LIBRARY 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 


Gl  FT    OF 


\ 
Ctes 


DOCUMENTS 


y  • 


REPORT 


OF    THE 


STATE  TAX  COMMISSION 


OF 


MISSOURI 


1903, 


INCLUDING  A  DIGEST  OF  THE  REVENUE  LAWS. 


JEFFERSON  CITY,   MO.: 
TRIBUNE  PKINTING  COMPANY,  STATE  PKINTBBS  AND  BINDERS. 


,3* 


ITY 


REPORT. 


To  Honorable  Alexander  M.  Dockery, 

Governor  of  the  State  of  Missouri : 

The  Commission  created  by  the  act  of  the  41st  General  As- 
sembly (Session  Acts  1901,  p.  203),  approved  April  17th,  1901, 
to  revise  the  revenue  laws  of  the  State,  was  appointed  on  the 
22nd  of  February,  1902,  and  at  once  entered  upon  the  discharge 
of  the  duties  assigned. 

SCOPE   OF   THE   WOKK. 

No  one  who  has  given  any  thought  to  the  vexed  problems  of 
taxation  will  expect  a  discussion  here  of  the  various  theories  ad- 
vanced upon  that  subject. 

The  tedious  and  painstaking  labor  necessary  to  a  proper  re- 
vision of  our  revenue  laws  and  the  difficulty  of  accomplishing 
satisfactory  results  cannot  be  overestimated. 

The  Commission  soon  realized  that,  in  the  time  at  the  dis- 
posal of  its  members,  little  more  could  be  done  in  this  report 
than  to  call  attention  to  the  more  glaring  defects  and  to  recom- 
mend improved  methods  of  administration. 

The  recommendations  are  intended  simply  as  the  best  sug- 
gestions the  Commission  can  now  offer  for  immediate  relief 
from  the  evils  in  our  tax  system,  to  which  reference  is  herein- 
after made. 

It  was  deemed  best,  in  order  to  accomplish  practical  re- 
sults, to  divide  the  work  and  assign  a  part  to  each  member,  and 
to  have  occasional  meetings  for  conference  and  comparison  of 
views.  This  plan  has  been  followed. 

COMPARISON  OF  TAX  LAWS  OF  THIS  AND  OTHER  STATES. 

There  are  many  defects  in  our  revenue  system.  It  is  very 
far  from  perfect.  But  an  ideal  system  of  taxation  has  not  been 

180S9fi 


4  Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission. 

devised,  or  at  least,  it  cannot  be  safely  said  that  such  a  system 
has  been  put  into  practical  operation. 

A  comparison  of  our  revenue  laws  with  those  of  other 
states  will  show  that  they  have  many  features  in  common.  The 
general  provisions  concerning  the  assessment  and  collection  of 
taxes,  the  subjects  of  taxation  and  the  method  of  raising  rev- 
enue in  a  number  of  our  sister  states  are  not  essentially  differ- 
ent from  ours. 

The  revenue  laws  of  Missouri  in  their  main  provisions  com- 
pare favorably  with  those  of  other  states. 

The  reports  of  the  various  tax  commissioners,  however,  in- 
dicate a  general  dissatisfaction  with  existing  conditions. 

This  is  true,  not  only  in  states  whose  general  plan  of  tax- 
ation is  similar  to  ours,  but  also  in  other  states  where  the  method 
of  raising  public  revenue  is  entirely  different. 

The  complaints  are  not  confined  to  any  state.  Our  exam- 
ination of  the  reports  of  the  various  tax  commissions  show 
that  there  is  dissatisfaction  in  every  state,  almost  without  ex- 
ception, with  its  tax  system  and  tax  laws. 

CONSTITUTIONAL   LIMITATIONS. 

Many  changes  that  have  been  suggested,  and  some  that 
seem  desirable  to  the  Commission,  cannot  be  made  on  account 
of  Constitutional  provisions. 

The  entire  article  on  "Kevenue  and  Taxation"  in  the  Con- 
stitution of  1875,  or  at  least  a  large  part  of  it,  should  be  re-writ- 
ten, before  thjere  can  be  any  deviation  from  the  general  plan 
outlined  therein. 

The  Legislature  is  so  hedged  about  and  hemmed  in  by  lim- 
itations in  the  fundamental  law  of  the  state  that,  as  the  Con- 
stitution stands,  no  statutory  change  can  be  made  in  the  general 
system  of  taxation  now  in  force. 

Statutory  amendments  must  therefore  be  confined  to  sup- 
plying omissions,  remedying  defects  and  providing  better  meth- 
ods of  administration. 

GENERAL  REVENUE  MEASURE. 

Many  of  the  provisions  of  our  statutes  are  well  adapted  to 
our  present  system,  and  are  as  satisfactory  as  any  that  could 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  5 

be  devised  under  existing  conditions.  Most  of  them  have  been 
construed  by  the  Supreme  Court  and  have  stood  the  test  of 
actual  operation.  The  various  state  and  county  officials,  as  well 
as  the  tax-payers,  have  become  familiar  with  them.  No  changes 
are  needed  in  a  number  of  sections  of  the  revenue  law. 

The  subject  of  taxation  presents  many  problems  about  which 
thoughtful  citizens  differ.  The  General  Assembly  may  conclude 
that  some  of  the  changes  and  additions  suggested  by  the  Com- 
mission should  be  adopted,  while  others  may  not  meet  with  ap- 
proval. 

Hence  it  has  seemed  unwise  to  submit  a  general  revenue 
measure,  which  could  not  be  changed  without  destroying  its 
symmetry  and  effect,  but  rather  to  present  separate  bills  con- 
cerning the  different  subjects,  and  separate  amendments  to  the 
various  sections  of  the  present  law  in  which  changes  are  recom- 
mended. 

ABSENCE   OF   UNIFOKM   ASSESSMENTS. 

Each  citizen  is  a  partner  in  the  enterprise  which  requires 
the  raising  of  public  revenues.  It  is  his  duty  to  contribute  Ms 
proportion  of  the  expenditures,  and  it  is  his  right  to  have  others 
do  likewise. 

Our  Constitution  "and  the  laws  made  in  pursuance  there- 
of," measure  this  duty  by  the  value  of  the  property  possessed 
by  the  tax-payer.  Whether  this  is  the  best  system  it  is  not  our 
purpose  at  this  time  to  inquire.  It  is  the  plan  laid  down  in  our 
Constitution. 

Equality  in  the  distribution  of  these  burdens  is  equity.  It 
is  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution  of  Missouri,  and  is  funda- 
mental in  any  just  system  of  taxation. 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  in  a  plan  of  taxation  based  upon 
the  value  of  property,  this  equality  cannot  be  secured  without 
uniformity  in  the  assessments.  It  matters  not  that  the  same  tax 
rate  is  levied  upon  all  property.  Unless  the  same  ratio  of  value 
is  taken  as  the  foundation  for  the  levy,  unfair  discriminations 
necessarily  result.  Where  some  property  is  over  valued,  and 
other  under  valued,  the  inequality  in  the  tax  is  just  as  great  as 
if  the  state  authorities,  or  the  county  courts,  should  fix  a  differ- 
ent rate  upon  the  property  of  different  individuals.  This 
would  not  be  tolerated  for  a  moment. 


6  Report  of  the  State  Ta.r  Commission. 

The  command  of  our  Constitution  is  that  "all  property 
subject  to  taxation  shall  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value, " 
and  " taxes  shall  be  uniform  upon  the  same  class  of  subjects 
within  the  territorial  limits  ot  the  authority  levying  the  tax." 

The  difficulty  in  securing  equality  is  not  so  much  in  the 
laws,  as  in  the  method  of  enforcing  them. 

The  complaint  has  been  general  that  the  assessments  have 
not  been  uniform  in  the  different  counties,  and  that  discrim- 
inations are  made  even  in  the  same  county  between  different 
kinds  of  property. 

The  Commission  addressed  a  letter  to  the  Collector,  Clerk 
of  the  County  Court  and  Assessor  of  each  county,  including  the 
proper  officials  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  asking  information  upon 
this  subject. 

Eeports  were  received  from  ninety-eight  counties  and  the 
City  of  St.  Louis.  These  would  be  indeed  startling  if  some  of 
the  facts  stated  therein  had  not  been  previously  known.  They 
show  a  condition  of  affairs  that  should  no  longer  be  permitted 
to  continue. 

It  is  within  the  bounds  of  truth  to  say  that  no  two  counties 
in  the  State  have  the  same  rule  for  the  assessment  of  all  classes 
of  property,  and,  generally  speaking,  there  is  absolutely  no  uni- 
formity as  to  the  proportion  of  the  actual  cash  value  taken  as 
the  basis  for  the  assessed  value. 

Some  counties  value  real  estate,  so  these  reports  show,  as 
low  as  thirty  per  cent,  of  its  selling  price,  while  others  have 
a  ninety  per  cent,  basis.  Some  assess  real  estate  at  thirty-three 
and  one-third  per  cent.,  money  and  credits  at  one  hundred  per 
cent,  and  tangible  personal  property  at  fifty  per  cent. 

There  is  an  absolute  want  of  equality  in  taxation  according 
to  the  replies  received  from  these  officers,  and  the  absence  of 
any  uniform  rule  throughout  the  State  for  assessing  property. 

It  .re suits  from  this  condition  that  some  counties  contribute 
more  than  their  part  to  the  State's  expenditures,  while  others 
are  charged  with  less  than  their  share. 

The  counties  in  which  local  conditions  induce  higher  as- 
sessment are  those  which  are  made  to  pay  the  greatest  amount 
of  State  taxes,  and  yet,  on  account  of  their  own  needs,  they  are 
less  able  to  bear  it. 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  1 

The  very  small  tax  rate  for  State  purposes  makes  this  in- 
equality less  burdensome  to  the  individual  tax-payer  than  at 
first  might  he  supposed. 

The  State  revenue  tax,  as  is  well  known,  is  only  fifteen  cents 
on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation,  and  hereafter  the  sum  neces- 
sary to  pay  interest  on  the  State  certificates  of  indebtedness  to 
the  school  and  seminary  funds  will  he  only  two  or  three  cents 
annually  on  each  hundred  dollars  valuation.  So  it  will  he  read- 
ily seen  that  the  exaction  made  by  the  State  from  the  property 
owner  is  indeed  a  very  small  part  of  his  taxes. 

Still  inequality  between  counties  is  wrong  in  principle  and 
should  be  remedied  as  far  as  possible. 

Then,  too,  where  the  counties  have  different  rules  for  the 
assessment  of  property,  or  no  definite  and  established  rule,  it  is 
impossible  to  fix  a  proper  basis  upon  which  to  assess  property 
that  extends  through  several  counties. 

The  courts  hold,  and  with  manifest  justice,  that  discrim- 
inations cannot  be  intentionally  made  in  valuing  property  for 
taxation,  without  violating  the  constitutional  right  of  the  citizen 
to  insist  upon  uniformity  in  such  assessments.  But  the  uninten- 
tional discriminations  are  equally  oppressive  in  their  practical 
results. 

SEPARATION  OF  STATE  AND  COUNTY  REVENUES. 

If  the  State  should  collect  its  revenues  from  other  sources 
than  a  direct  levy  upon  real  and  personal  property,  leaving  to 
the  counties  the  exclusive  right  to  tax  such  property  for  local 
purposes,  as  advocated  by  many  citizens,  each  county  could  adopt 
its  own  basis  of  assessment  without,  at  least,  imposing  an  unfair 
burden  of  state  taxes  upon  other  localities— however  unequal 
the  burdens  of  county  and  municipal  taxation  might  be  among 
the  tax-payers  of  such  county,  by  reason  of  discriminations  in 
the  assessment  of  different  kinds  of  property  therein. 

The  aggregate  taxes  for  county,  municipal  and  school  pur- 
poses upon  railroad,  street  railroad,  bridge,  telegraph  and  tele- 
phone companies,  and  other  public  service  corporations,  together 
with  the  tax  upon  foreign  insurance  companies  apportioned  to  the 
various  counties,  have  been  practically  equal  to  the  total  taxes 
for  the  State  Revenue  Fund  collected  from  real  and  personal 


8  Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 

property,  including  the  ad  valorem  tax  upon  merchandise,  or  at 
least  there  has  not  been  any  very  great  difference  between  these 
two  amounts,  and  hereafter  there  will  only  be  two  or  three  cents 
on  the  hundred  dollars  needed  for  the  State  Interest  Fund. 
Any  loss  to  the  State  would  be  more  than  overcome  by  the  dif- 
ference in  the  cost  of  the  assessment  and  collection  of  the  State 
revenue,  which  now  requires  a  bi-ennial  appropriation  of  $350.- 
000  to  $375,000 ;  but  this  expense  would  be  an  additional  charge 
upon  the  counties. 

By  levying  a  rate  upon  corporate  property  now  assessed  by 
the  State  Board  of  Equalization,  sufficient  to  bring  into  the 
State  treasury  an  amount  equal  to  the  sum  collected  at  present 
from  these  corporations  for  all  purposes,  and  by  retaining  the 
tax  upon  foreign  insurance  companies  heretofore  apportioned 
to  the  different  counties,  the  State  might  forego  its  tax  upon  real 
and  personal  property,  including  the  ad  valorem  tax  upon  mer- 
chandise, without  loss  of  income. 

It  will  also  be  important  to  know  how  the  revenues  of  the 
different  counties  will  be  affected. 

The  Commission  has  obtained  a  table  to  be  printed  as  an 
appendix  to  this  report  showing  these  facts  for  the  information 
of  the  General  Assembly. 

Our  Constitution,  however,  stands  in  the  way  of  this  method 
of  taxation. 

An  amendment,  embodying  a  number  of  changes  in  the  fun- 
damental law  of  the  State,  must  precede  any  legislation  in  that 
direction;  and  after  the  necessary  constitutional  changes  shall 
have  been  made,  the  statutes  must  be  adjusted  to  the  new  con- 
ditions. 

A  change  of  this  character,  however,  cannot  properly  be 
made  without  revising  many  of  the  sections  in  the  article  con-, 
cerning  "Bevenue  and  Taxation "  in  the  present  Constitution. 

The  Constitution  of  1875  is  so  unsuited  to  a  different  sys- 
tem that  to  make  it  conform  to  the  proposed  change,  and  so  ad- 
just its  various  provisions  as  to  avoid  conflict  and  uncertainty, 
will  require  a  remodeling,  substantially,  of  article  X  thereof. 

Section  5  of  that  article  declares  that  "All  railroad  cor- 
porations in  this  State,  or  doing  business  therein,  shall  be  sub- 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  9 

ject  to  taxation  for  State,  county,  municipal  and  oilier  purposes 
on  real  and  personal  property  owned  by  them, ' '  etc. 

This  clearly  stands  in  the  way  of  withdrawing  such  property 
from  local  taxation. 

Section  9  provides  that  no  property  in  any  city,  town  or 
other  municipal  corporation  shall  be  released  from  its  propor- 
tionate share  of  the  taxes  to  be  levied  for  State  purposes. 

This  prohibits  the  withdrawal  of  such  property  from  State 
taxation. 

Section  8  limits  the  tax  rate  for  State  revenue,  when  the 
assessed  value  of  the  property  of  the  State  has  reached  nine 
hundred  million  dollars,  to  fifteen  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars 
valuation. 

This  limitation  cannot  be  left  in  force  if  all  property  other 
than  that  belonging  to  public  service  corporations  shall  be  with- 
drawn from  liability  for  State  taxes. 

Section  11  of  the  same  article  limits  the  maximum  rate  for 
county,  school  and  city  purposes.  Many  counties,  school  dis- 
tricts and  cities  derive  a  substantial  part  of  their  revenue  from 
taxes  upon  public  service  corporations.  If  deprived  of  this, 
the  rate  that  may  be  levied  by  them  upon  other  property  must  be 
increased  and  the  limitations  of  section  11  changed. 

Then  too,  the  municipal  and  local  taxes  on  railroads  and  the 
property  of  like  corporations  now  go  to  the  cities,  villages  and 
school  districts.  A  change  in  the  maximum  rate  for  county  pur- 
poses would  be  insufficient  to  adjust  section  11  to  the  new  con- 
ditions. Great  care  will  be  necessary  in  fixing  the  rate  that 
may  be  levied  by  the  various  subdivisions  of  the  county  upon 
other  property,  so  that  each  subdivision  may  be  compensated 
for  the  loss  of  the  revenue  heretofore  received  from  railroad 
and  similar  taxes. 

The  maximum  rate,  under  section  11,  that  may  be  levied  for 
local  purposes  is  based  upon  the  assessed  value  for  State  and 
county  purposes;  and  section  12  limits  municipal  indebtedness 
to  five  per  cent,  of  the  valuation  of  the  county,  city  or  school 
district  proposing  to  incur  the  debt,  as  shown  by  the  assessment 
for  State  and  county  purposes  next  before  the  last  assessment. 
It  is  apparent  that  these  sections  should  be  altered,  in  the  event 
the  proposed  change  is  carried  into  effect. 


JO  Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 

Section  18  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  State  Board  of  Equali- 
zation to  equalize  the  assessments  of  real  and  personal  property 
among  the  several  counties  of  the  State,  which  would  be  unnec- 
essary if  a  State  tax  is  not  collected  from  such  property. 

Four  amendments,  involving  changes  in  sections  11  and  12 
of  article  X  of  the  Constitution,  were  adopted  at  the  last  gen- 
eral election,  and  these  amendments  should  be  considered  in 
connection  with  the  matters  to  which  attention  has  just  been 
called. 

These  references  to  the  different  sections  of  the  Constitu- 
tion that  will  be  affected  by  any  change  of  the  revenue  system, 
show  that  it  will  be  impracticable  to  relieve  real  and  personal 
property  from  State  taxation,  and  to  levy  such  taxes  wholly 
upon  the  property  of  public  service  corporations,  by  an  amend- 
ment to  a  single  section  of  the  Constitution. 

If  separate  amendments  to  the  different  sections  should  be 
submitted,  one  might  be  adopted  and  others  defeated. 

I^the  General  Assembly  deems  it  wise,  at  this  time,  to  pro- 
pose a  change  in  the  Constitution  in  the  particulars  referred 
to,  the  best  method  of  accomplishing  that  result  would  be  to  sub- 
mit a  single  amendment,  repealing  the  entire  article  on  "Rev- 
enue  and  Taxation, ' '  and  substituting  a  new  one  in  lieu  of  article 
X,  embodying  the  changes  necessary  under  the  proposed  plan. 

A  single  amendment  may  include  all  necessary  changes  re- 
lating to  one  subject,  just  as  a  legislative  enactment  may  do. 
This  was  recently  determined  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  Garbert 
vs.  Railway  Co.,  70  Southwestern  Reporter,  891. 

Such  an  amendment  might  authorize  the  Legislature  to  pro- 
vide for  the  change  of  system  without  making  it  obligatory  so. 
to  do. 

Another  plan  for  the  separation  of  State  and  county  rev- 
enues has  been  suggested  and  was  recommended  by  the  Chamber 
of  Commerce  of  New  York.  It  is  known  as  the  "Purdy  Meth- 
od. ' '  Without  undertaking  to  set  out  the  plan  in  detail,  it  pro- 
vides in  effect  that  the  whole  amount  of  revenue  needed  by  the 
State  shall  be  first  ascertained,  and  then  the  aggregate  of  the 
taxes  collected  by  all  of  the  counties  for  ordinary  county  ex- 
penditures, and  each  county  shall  pay  the  same  proportion  of 
the  funds  required  for  State  purposes  that  the  amount  collected 


Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission.  11 

by  such  county  for  its  usual  expenses  bears  to  the  total  sum 
collected  by  all  the  counties  for  such  expenses;  or  to  state  it 
differently,  the  part  a  particular  county  must  pay  of  the  State's 
revenue  is  found  by  taking  a  fraction  of  the  sum  needed  by  the 
State,  of  which  fraction  the  amount  collected  by  such  county 
for  its  ordinary  purposes  shall  be  the  numerator  and  the  total 
collected  by  all  the  counties  for  such  purposes  shall  be  the  de- 
nominator. In  other  words  each  county  pays  a  part  of  the 
State  taxes  in  proportion  to  the  revenue  collected  by  it  for  its 
usual  purposes,  and  the  counties  are  given  local  option  as  to 
the  method  of  raising  the  revenues. 

Local  option  in  the  amount  of  taxes  to  be  collected  in  a 
municipality  or  county  in  this  State  may  be  given  by  simply  re- 
moving the  limitation  in  section  11  of  the  Constitution. 

In  lieu  of  a  separation  of  the  sources  of  State  and  county 
revenue,  a  third  plan  has  been  proposed— that  the  inequalities 
in  State  taxation  resulting  from  the  varying  assessed  values 
in  the  different  counties  might  be  remedied,  if  the  State  Board 
of  Equalization,  instead  of  attempting  to  equalize  the  values 
between  different  counties,  were  required  to  apportion  the  State 
tax  among  the  several  counties  in  proportion  to  the  real  value 
of  the  property  without  regard  to  the  local  assessment.  Under 
this  plan  the  State  Board  would  ascertain  the  proportion  of 
the  real  value  taken  in  each  county  as  the  assessed  value,  and 
apportion  the  State  tax  accordingly,  so  that  each  county  would 
pay  the  same  amount  as  if  its  assessment  had  been  made  on  a 
full  cash  basis. 

To  carry  out  either  of  the  two  plans  last  mentioned  would 
require  as  many  constitutional  changes,  and  the  same  can  only 
be  safely  made  in  the  manner  suggested  in  reference  to  the  first 
plan. 

The  strong  desire  expressed  by  many  citizens  for  some 
change  in  the  method  of  raising  State  taxes  has  induced  the 
Commission  to  state  the  plans  that  have  been  proposed  and  the 
obstacles  in  the  way  of  carrying  them  out,  and  how  the  same 
may  be  removed. 

The  Commission  has  set  out  these  plans  and  the  Constitu- 
tional method  by  which  they  can  be  presented  for  adoption,  and 
submits  it  to  the  Legislature  as  the  representatives  of  the  peo- 


12  Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 

pie  to  determine  whether  it  is  wise  to  propose  a  constitutional 
amendment  to  the  voters  of  the  State  embodying  any  of  said 
plans. 

STATUTOKY  CHANGES. 

Any  changes  in  our  laws  that  will  bring  immediate  prac- 
tical results  must  be  made  by  statutory  amendments,  conform- 
able to  our  present  Constitution. 

DEFECTS    IN    ADMINISTRATION    OF    EEVENUE    LAWS. 

Attention  has  already  been  called  to  the  want  of  uniformity 
in  the  assessments  of  property  in  the  different  counties,  and 
the  consequent  inequality  in  the  burden  of  State  taxation. 

A  more  serious  evil  consists  in  the  fact  that,  under  the 
practical  workings  of  our  system,  vast  amounts  of  money,  notes 
and  credits  wholly  escape  taxation.  This  condition  is  so  well 
known  and  understood  that  an  attempt  to  present  statistics  on 
the  subject  would  be  useless. 

Aside  from  the  enormous  loss  of  revenue  to  the  State, 
counties  and  municipalities,  such  a  condition  necessarily  works 
a  gross  injustice  to  the  owners  of  real  estate  and  other  prop- 
erty fairly  listed  for  taxation.  Under  present  conditions,  a 
large  part  of  the  money  and  credits  held  in  this  State  escapes 
its  just  share  of  taxation,  thus  casting  an  inequitable  burden 
upon  real  estate,  estates  of  decedents  and  minors,  whose  prop- 
erty is  disclosed  by  the  public  records ;  persons  of  small  means 
and  conscientious  tax-payers,  who  return  true  assessment  lists. 

This  condition  is  not  peculiar  to  our  State.  The  same  com- 
plaint is  made  everywhere. 

The  very  fact  of  the  inequality  and  injustice  resulting  from 
this  wholesale  evasion  of  taxation  on  money  and  notes  is  re- 
garded by  many  as  a  sufficient  justification  or  excuse  for  the 
concealment  or  under  valuation  of  their  own  property.  Many 
contend  that  they  are  not  called  upon  to  submit  to  an  exaction 
which  their  neighbors  escape. 

Ex-President  Harrison,  in  an  address  delivered  in  Chicago, 
February  22nd,  1898,  said  upon  this  subject: 

"It  is  easy  to  see  how  this  offense  against  morality  and  pa- 
triotism has  grown  to  such  proportions.  The  very  sense  that 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  13 

inequality  is  injustice  has  promoted  it.  One  man  sees  that  his 
neighbor  is  not  making  a  conscientious  tax  return,  and  that  if 
he  returns  his  property  honestly  he  will  pay  disproportionately. 
The  result  is  that  his  conscience  finds  a  salve  in  the  saying. 
'Everybody  does  it.'  " 

It  is  also  believed  that  another  fruitful  cause  of  this  ten- 
dency to  evade  taxation  on  money  and  notes  lies  in  the  fact  al- 
ready pointed  out  that,  in  many  instances  this  class  of  property, 
when  fairly  given  in  or  found  upon  the  probate  records,  is  as- 
sessed at  a  much  higher  relative  value  than  other  property. 
Some  attempt  to  excuse  themselves  from  making  proper  re- 
turns on  this  ground. 

The  omissions  of  inequalities  between  the  assessments  in 
different  localities  and  the  discriminations  between  different 
classes  of  property,  in  this  State  do  not  result  from  any  stat- 
utory provision  or  Constitutional  requirement. 

On  the  contrary,  the  Constitution  declares  that  all  prop- 
erty shall  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value,  and  all  of  the  pro- 
visions of  the  statutes  are  made  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out 
this  idea  of  uniformity. 

The  fault  is  not  in  the  law,  but  in  its  administration. 

It  is  doubtless  true  that  inequalities  cannot  be  entirely 
avoided,  but  they  can  be  lessened  by  improved  methods  of  admin- 
istration. 

M  ASSESSED  VALUES. 

The  Constitution  requires  "that  all  property  shall  be  taxed 
in  proportion  to  its  value."  To  carry  out  this  provision  sec- 
tion 9180  of  our  revenue  act  provides  that  all  property  shall 
be  assessed  at  its  true  value  in  money. 

In  practice,  however,  it  is  a  well  known  fact,  conceeded  by 
everybody,  that  this  section  is  wholly  disregarded. 

In  consequence  there  has  been  an  independent  scaling  down 
of  values  in  each  county  according  to  the  individual  ideas  of 
the  different  assessors,  until  there  is  no  uniformity  whatever 
upon  the  subject. 

There  is  no  concert  of  action  among  the  assessors  and  no 
supervisory  control  by  any  responsible  head  to  the  system  such 
as  would  bring  about  uniformity. 


14  Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 

Local  officials  have  failed  to  realize  that  a  decrease  in  local 
demands  for  revenue  should  be  met  by  a  reduction  in  the  tax 
rate  and  not  by  a  sliding  scale  of  assessments. 

The  practice  has  so  long  prevailed  throughout  the  State  to 
assess  property  at  less  than  its  actual  cash  value,  notwith- 
standing the  statutory  requirement  to  the  contrary,  that  every 
attempt  to  change  the  practice  has  failed. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  assessors  of  the  State  in  1893— or  1894 
—an  effort  to  fix  a  uniform  rule  to  be  acted  upon  by  each  as- 
sessor accomplished  no  practical  results. 

The  Auditor,  in  his  report  for  1899-1900,  p.  32,  calls  at- 
tention to  this  condition,  and  suggests  that  fifty  per  cent,  of  the 
actual  value  be  adopted  as  the  basis  for  assessments. 

The  failure  to  assess  property  at  its  actual  cash  value,  not- 
withstanding the  statute  so  requires,  is  not  peculiar  to  this  State. 
The  custom  to  assess  at  less  than  such  value  seems  to  prevail 
generally  in  other  states.  Every  attempt  to  make  a  change  in 
this  practice  in  these  states  has  also  been  unsuccessful. 

The  Wisconsin  Tax  Commission,  in  its  report  for  1901,  says : 
' k  The  mandate  of  the  statute  that  property  shall  be  assessed  at 
the  true  or  cash  value  has  never  been  followed.  Assessments 
were  made  at  varying  percentages  of  the  true  value,  so  that  here- 
tofore no  one  could  form  an  intelligent  judgment  of  the  value 
of  the  taxable  property  in  the  State." 

Again,  in  the  same  report :  l  '  The  usual  practice  has  been 
to  make  the  assessment  at  much  less  than  full  value.  There 
is  little,  if  any,  uniformity  in  the  practice  in  different  assess- 
ment districts  as  to  the  percentage  of  the  true  value  taken  as 
the  basis  for  assessments.  Indeed  in  many  districts  it  is  impos- 
sible to  discover  that  any  definite  basis  has  been  employed.'' 

The  same  tax  Commission,  which  appears  to  have  had  sup- 
ervisory control  over  assessments,  and  not  merely  power  to  re- 
vise the  laws,  attempted  in  1900  to  bring  about  a  compliance  with 
the  statutory  requirement  of  an  assessment  at  full  value,  but 
the  results  were  not  satisfactory. 

In  the  report  of  the  Chairman  of  the  Colorado  Commission 
we  find  this  statement : 

"The  Constitution  and  laws  of  Colorado  require  all  prop- 
erty to  be  assessed  at  its  full  cash  value.  Yet  not  an  assessor 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  15 

in  the  state  pretends  to  obey  this  law,  nor  do  the  county  com- 
missioners or  courts  attempt  to  enforce  it.  Governor  Thomas, 
in  his  inaugural  address  says :  ' '  In  theory  this  requirement  may 
be  just ;  in  practice  it  never  was  and  never  can  be  made  effect- 
ive/ and  yet  assessors  are  required  to  swear  that  they  have  so 
assessed  all  property  in  this  State." 

The  Minnesota  Commission  uses  this  language:  "It  is  ob- 
vious that  valuations  for  the  purposes  of  assessment  have  been 
but  slightly  influenced  by  actual  values. ' '  This  is  the  experience 
in  a  state  where  the  Constitution  itself  seems  to  require  that  all 
property  shall  be  assessed  at  its  actual  cash  value. 

The  same  complaint  is  made  in  the  report  of  the  Kansas 
Commission. 

Doubtless  the  same  state  of  facts  exists  and  similar  quo- 
tations could  be  made  from  other  states,  if  it  were  deemed  nec- 
essary. 

The  failure  of  every  attempt  to  enforce  the  provisions  of 
our  statute  requiring  the  assessment  of  property  at  its  full  value, 
furnishes  a  strong  reason  for  a  change  of  the  law. 

The  practice  to  disregard  this  requirement  leaves  every  as- 
sessor at  liberty  to  fix  his  own  rule  of  valuation,  and,  in  effect, 
leaves  us  without  any  law  upon  this  subject,  or  at  least  without 
any  which  there  is  any  pretense  of  following,— which  is  worse 
than  none  at  all. 

The  practice  has  so  long  prevailed  to  assess  at  a  percentage 
less  than  the  true  value,  and  every  attempt  to  change  the  custom 
having  failed,  it  would  seem  that  the  only  thing  remaining  is  to 
try  some  other  plan.  The  Constitution  does  not  require  the  as- 
sessment of  property  at  its  actual  value,  but  in  proportion  to  its 
value. 

It  is  therefore  recommended  that  the  statutes  be  amended 
so  as  to  require: 

SEPARATE  COLUMNS  IN  THE  ASSESSOR  *S  BOOK  FOE  ACTUAL  AND 
TAXABLE  VALUES. 

Statutes  are  in  force  in  some  of  the  states  requiring  prop- 
erty to  be  listed  at  its  full  market  value  in  casli,  which  must  be 
stated  in  one  column  of  the  assessor's  book,  and  a  certain  per 


16  Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission. 

cent,  of  this  value,  fixed  by  law,  is  then  entered  in  a  second  col- 
umn as  the  valuation  of  the  property  for  purposes  of  taxation. 
Iowa  and  Illinois,  and  probably  other  states,  have  adopted  this 
plan  and  it  is  reported  to  have  worked  well  in  practice.  After 
the  full  value  of  the  property  has  been  ascertained  and  set  down 
in  one  column  by  the  assessor,  a  certain  per  cent,  thereof,  fixed 
by  law,  is  entered  in  another  column  as  the  value  upon  which  the 
taxes  are  to  be  levied. 

It  is  not  thought  or  claimed  that  this  will  be  a  complete 
remedy  for  the  evils  resulting  from  a  want  of  uniform  assess- 
ments. It  may  not  accomplish  the  results  anticipated,  but  it 
certainly  can  be  no  worse  in  practice  than  the  system  now  in 
vogue. 

This  plan,  in  view  of  the  custom  heretofore  prevailing  in 
the  State,  seems  to  be  more  feasible  than  an  attempt  to  raise  all 
valuations  throughout  the  State  at  once  to  a  full  cash  basis.  It 
will  not  be  so  great  an  innovation  upon  the  existing  custom,  and 
will  probably  be  more  readily  sustained  by  public  sentiment  and 
more  cheerfully  executed  by  public  officers. 

This  plan  would  at  least  have  some  advantages  over  the 
practice  now  in  force.  The  tax-payer  would  be  able  to  make 
a  just  criticism  of  the  assessment  of  his  property  and  that  of 
his  neighbors,  and  the  public  would  have  the  means  of  judging 
of  the  correctness  of  the  assessor's  work;  whereas,  under  the 
custom  now  prevailing,  there  is  no  way  to  determine  either. 

An  assessor  would  be  more  apt  to  fix  the  actual  cash  value 
correctly,  where  only  a  per  cent,  thereof  is  to  be  taken  as  the 
taxable  value  than  if  the  tax  was  to  be  levied  upon  the  full  value 
fixed  by  him. 

The  rule  would  also  have  the  effect  of  enabling  anyone  to 
see  at  a  glance  the  actual  value  placed  by  assessing  boards  and 
officers  upon  all  property,  whether  corporate  or  individual,  and 
would  furnish  a  means  of  testing  its  accuracy  which  does  not 
now  exist. 

The  statute  should  make  it  obligatory  upon  the  assessor  to 
inspect  the  property  and  to  state  under  oath  in  his  assessment 
book  the  actual  market  value,  at  ordinary  private  sale,  of  the 
property  assessed  by  him.  This  value  should  not  be  based  on 
forced  sales. 


Report  of  Ihc  State  Tax  Commission.  17 

The  law  should  be  so  plain  that  there  could  be  no  misunder- 
standing its  purpose. 

A  wi]ful  failure  to  conform  to  its  requirements  should  be 
made  an  offense  punishable  by  forfeiture  of  office. 

The  State  Tax  Commissioner,  hereafter  suggested,  where 
there  is  any  palpable  evasion  of  the  rule,  should  have  the  power 
to  require  a  re-assessment  under  his  supervision. 

If  the  aggregate  assessments  for  taxable  purposes  under 
this  plan  should  be  greatly  increased  in  any  county,  the  local 
authorities  can  levy  a  lower  tax  rate,  so  that  no  more  revenue 
will  be  collected  than  is  needed. 

The  Legislature  also  can  by  law  fix  the  maximum  tax  rate, 
so  that  no  more  revenue  shall  be  collected,  if  the  assessment 
for  taxable  purposes  shall  be  increased,  than  is  now  received, 
and  this  was  done  in  Iowa  when  this  plan  was  first  adopted  there. 

The  percentage  of  the  real  value  that  shall  be  taken  as  the 
taxable  value  should  be  sufficiently  high  to  enable  the  subdi- 
visions of  the  State  needing  the  greatest  amount  of  revenue  to 
collect  enough  taxes  under  existing  constitutional  rates  to  meet 
their  requirements. 

If  the  General  Assembly  deems  it  proper  to  try  this  plan,  it 
should  be  made  applicable  to  all  property  upon  which  an  ad  va- 
lorem tax  is  levied,  and  should  go  into  effect  on  the  first  of  June, 
1904,  when  the  assessment  begins  for  the  taxes  of  1905.  This 
assessment  must  be  completed  on  or  before  January  1, 1905,  and 
an  abstract  of  the  assessment  in  each  county  forwarded  to  the 
State  Auditor  on  or  before  February  20th  of  that  year.  The 
Legislature  will  then  be  in  session,  and  having  definite  knowledge 
of  the  aggregate  amount  of  such  assessments,  can  properly  ad- 
just the  State  tax  rate,  as  well  as  the  maximum  rate  for  county 
purposes  to  be  levied  by  the  county  courts  at  the  May  term 
thereafter  for  the  taxes  of  1905,  so  that  there  need  be  no  change 
in  the  total  revenue  collected,  even  if  the  "assessment  for  tax- 
able purposes,"  as  distinguished  from  the  actual  value  set  out 
on  the  books  should  be  different  from  former  assessments. 


18  Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 

STATE  TAX  COMMISSIONER. 

Some  twelve  or  more  states  have  within  recent  years  es- 
tablished the  office  of  state  tax  commissioner,  and  it  would  be 
well  for  this  State  to  create  that  office. 

This  officer  should  be  given  large  supervisory  powers  over 
local  assessors.  It  should  be  his  duty  to  visit  the  different  coun- 
ties, advise,  confer  with  and  instruct  the  assessing  officers;  to 
inspect  the  work  of  assessment  and  see  that  a  proper  basis  of  val- 
uation is  adopted  and  enforced;  to  attend  the  county  boards  of 
equalization  whenever  necessary,  and  to  represent  the  State,  or 
see  that  it  is  properly  represented  before  such  boards ;  to  super- 
intend the  enforcement  of  the  collateral  inheritance  tax  law  and 
the  collection  of  that  tax.  He  should  see  that  the  assessors  fol- 
low the  requirements  of  the  law  and  cause  them  to  be  proceeded 
against  if  they  fail  or  refuse. 

It  should  be  his  duty  to  investigate  the  values  of  the  prop- 
erty of  railroad  and  other  public  service  corporations,  as  well 
as  the  values  of  property  generally  throughout  the  State,  and 
to  attend  the  meetings  of  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  and 
give  the  members  thereof  the  benefit  of  this  information. 

In  other  words,  he  should  be  the  supervisor  of  all  matters 
of  assessment. 

In  other  states  the  results  of  this  supervision  have  fully 
justified  the  creation  of  the  office,  and  the  increase  in  the  revenue 
has  been  far  greater  than  the  expense  incurred.  The  local  as- 
sessors have  been  more  efficient ;  the  amount  of  property  listed 
for  taxation  has  been  greatly  increased,  and  the  inequalities  and 
discriminations  have  at  least  been  reduced. 

The  Minnesota  Commission  says :  1 1  The  experiences  of  In- 
diana, Michigan  and  other  states  visited  by  the  present  Commis- 
sion leave  no  room  for  doubt  as  to  the  wisdom  of  providing  for 
a  permanent  tax  commission. ' ' 

The  late  ex-Governor  Pingree,  in  his  farewell  message  to 
the  Legislature  of  Michigan,  December  31,  1900,  indulges  in 
strong  language  commendatory  of  the  measure  creating  a  tax 
commission  in  that  state.  He  thus  expresses  his  views  upon  the 
subject:  "When  you  are  thoroughly  familiar  with  the  result 


Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission.  19 

of  its  work  I  know  you  will  affirm  the  statements  which  I  have 
heretofore  made  in  this  message  that  the  law  creating  it  is  the- 
most  important  one  ever  enacted  by  a  Michigan  Legislature 
1  submit  herewith  a  table  which  shows  the  increased  valuation 
of  the  real  and  personal  property  in  the  State,  made  as  a  result 
of  the  work  of  the  Tax  Commission. 

1899  1900 

Assessed  valuation  of  real  estate. .  .$825,858,711  $1,006,453,013 
Assessed  valuation  of  personal  prop.  142,330,376  310,997,015 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  increase  of  the  assessed  valuation 
of  the  property  of  the  State,  as  the  result  of  only  one  year's 
work  of  the  Commission,  is  nearly  $350,000,000. " 

The  Commission  believes  that  the  most  important  recom- 
mendation it  can  make,  and  the  best  thing  that  can  be  done  to 
improve  our  tax  system  under  our  Constitution,  i?  to  create  the 
office  of  State  Tax  Commissioner,  with  broa.l  supervisory 
powers  over  local  assessing  officers  and  boards  as  above  sug- 
gested. 

PERSONAL    PROPERTY. 

The  inherent  difficulty  encountered  in  nay  system  for  the 
taxation  of  personal  property,  and  especially  intangible  prop- 
erty, consists  in  the  fact  that  in  the  end  tl.e  State  must  rely  on 
a  disclosure  by  the  tax-payer. 

The  temptations  to  evade  taxation  ar  e  great,  and  the  chances 
of  detection  small. 

The  very  general  classification  of  the  kinds  of  personal  prop- 
erty made  in  our  statute,  including  the  omnibus  class  for  "all 
property  not  above  enumerated, "  affords  every  opportunity  for 
concealment,  evasion  and  under  valuation,  and  renders  it  ex- 
tremely difficult  for  the  assessor  or  the  county  board  of  equali- 
zation to  form  any  definite  idea  as  to  the  real  amount  of  prop- 
erty or  the  correctness  of  the  valuation. 

To  illustrate,  the  term  "neat  cattle "  used  in  the  statutory 
classification  may  mean  anything  from  cows  and  calves  to  steers 
in  the  feed-lot.  It  is  evident  that  a  more  detailed  classification 
and  description  of  property  would  furnish  a  better  basis  for  a 
proper  valuation,  and  afford  better  opportunities  for  the  cor- 
rection of  errors. 


20  Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission. 

It  is  also  thought  that  a  better  opportunity  would  be  af- 
forded to  search  the  conscience  of  the  property  owner  and  com- 
pel disclosure  of  intangible  property,  if  a  separate  list  were  re- 
quired for  the  assessment  of  money,  notes,  accounts  and  other 
credits,  instead  of  lumping  them  in  with  other  property. 

To  this  list  should  be  appended  suitable  interrogatories  as 
to  the  nature  and  amount  of  such  property,  how  and  where  se- 
cured, and  whether  the  security  on  the  records  stands  in  the 
name  of  the  assessed,  or  of  some  other  person,  who  has  as- 
signed it  to  him,  to  all  of  which  the  property  owner  should  be 
required  to  make  full  and  direct  answers  under  oath. 

It  might  also  be  provided  that  these  lists  should  be  filed  in 
the  office  of  the  county  clerk  and  be  preserved  for  at  least  three 
years. 

The  assessment  of  different  kinds  of  property  will  require 
different  lists  and  different  interrogatories  to  be  answered  by 
the  tax-payer. 

The  preparation  of  suitable  forms,  blanks  and  interroga- 
tories to  meet  varying  condidtions  should  be  left  to  the  Tax 
Commissioner,  and  assessors  should  be  required  to  follow  his 
direction  in  listing  property. 

These  recommendations  will  require  the  amendment  of  sec- 
tions 9144,  9147  and  9180  and  some  other  sections  of  the  general 
statutes. 

ASSESSMENT  OF  REAL  ESTATE, 

Under  the  present  law  real  estate  is  required  to  be  assessed 
annually.  In  practice,  however,  this  amounts  to  little  more  than 
an  annual  recopying  of  the  preceding  assessment,  and  results 
in  no  practical  good. 

As  a  rule,  real  estate  values  are  fairly  stable  in  this  State, 
so  that  the  cost  of  annual  assessments  of  such  property  has  been 
far  in  excess  of  any  increase  of  the  revenue  from  that  source. 

It  is  suggested  that  one  assessment  of  real  property  in  four 
years  would  answer  every  purpose  in  this  State,  and  at  the 
same  time  result  in  a  very  considerable  saving  of  expense.  More 
time  could  then  be  given  to  make  the  assessment,  thus  enabling 
the  officer  to  make  a  personal  inspection  and  accomplish  better 
results  in  his  valuation  of  lands;  and  this  would  also  afford  him 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  21 

opportunity  for  a  more  careful  assessment  of  the  various  classes 
of  personal  property  in  other  years. 

Under  such  an  amendment  there  would  be  an  actual  assess- 
ment of  real  estate  values  every  four  years,  whereas,  there  is 
now  theoretically  an  annual  assessment,  but  in  reality  no  stated 
period  in  which  there  is  an  entire  re-valuation  of  such  property. 

The  State  can  well  afford  to  pay  a  greater  compensation 
for  a  proper  assessment  of  real  estate  once  in  every  four  years, 
than  is  now  allowed  for  each  annual  assessment,  and  still  save 
more  than  one-half  of  the  expense  incurred  for  the  assessment 
of  realty. 

In  order  to  reach  any  substantial  increase  of  values  during 
the  interim,  from  the  erection  of  improvements  and  other  causes, 
the  assessor,  when  making  the  personal  assessment,  should  be 
required  to  note  any  material  change  .in  value  from  improve- 
ments and  other  like  causes,  and  report  the  same  to  the  county 
board  of  equalization  as  a  basis  for  correcting  and  adjusting 
the  real  estate  book.  In  the  same  way  property  owners  may 
apply  to  the  board  of  equalization  and  obtain  reductions,  where 
there  has  been  any  material  decrease  in  values  from  the  destruc- 
tion of  improvements  or  other  causes.  Changes  in  ownership 
can  be  noted  in  the  same  way. 

It  is  believed  from  past  experience  that  only  a  small  percent- 
age of  the  property  will  require  such  adjustment,  and  that  little 
trouble  or  inconvenience  will  result.  There  is  no  need  for  an 
annual  assessment  to  meet  such  unusual  cases.  The  cost  is  too 
great  for  the  good  accomplished. 

COUNTY  BOARD  OF  EQUALIZATION. 

Under  the  present  law  the  power  of  the  county  board  of 
equalization  is  limited  to  raising  or  lowering  the  valuation  of 
such  property  as  appears  on  the  assessment  list.  It  is  powerless 
to  add  other  personal  property  to  the  list,  except  under  a  pro- 
ceeding to  subject  the  taxpayer  to  treble  taxation  for  a  fraudu- 
lent list,  as  provided  in  section  9150,  E.  S.  1899,  which  is  rarely 
resorted  to. 

The  courts  hold  that  the  board  cannot  make  an  assessment 
of  property. 


22  Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 

Its  duty  is  to  equalize  assessments  already  made.  Broader 
powers  should  be  conferred  upon  it. 

The  assessor  may  well  hesitate  to  file  a  notice,  charging  one 
of  his  fellow  citizens  with  making  a  fraudulent  return,  especially 
in  the  absence  of  personal  knowledge  of  the  facts. 

The  members  of  the  board  may  be  satisfied  from  general 
information,  upon  which  a  reasonable  man  would  act  in  his 
own  affairs,  that  an  assessment  list  does  not  contain  all  of  the 
personal  property  of  the  tax-payer,  but  they  cannot  now  correct 
it  in  the  absence  of  a  statutory  complaint  by  the  assessor.  Omis- 
sions may  occur  from  accident  or  mistake,  as  well  as  fraud. 

The  board  may  well  be  entrusted  with  the  general  power 
to  revise  and  correct  tax  lists  and  to  make  additions  thereto, 
from  the  best  information  it  can  obtain.  The  rights  of  the  tax- 
payer can  be  fully  protected  by  requiring  notice  to  him  of  any 
change  and  affording  him  an  opportunity  to  have  any  injustice 
corrected  by  a  hearing  before  the  board. 

OMITTED  PROPERTY. 

The  statutes  now  provide  for  the  assessment  in  subsequent 
years  of  property  omitted  from  any  cause  from  a  previous  as- 
sessment. It  is  then  taxed  for  the  years  during  which  it  escaped 
taxation.  It  is  necessary  upon  the  discovery  of  such  property 
after  the  return  of  the  assessor's  books  for  any  year  to  wait 
until  the  next  annual  assessment  for  the  proper  remedy. 

Instances  have  been  called  to  our  attention  where  money, 
notes  and  bonds  belonging  to  an  estate  have  been  .overlooked 
and,  before  the  next  year's  assessment,  final  settlement  was 
made  of  the  estate.  Cases  also  arise  where  personal  property 
or  real  estate,  is  accidentally  or  by  design  kept  from  the  asses- 
sor's books.  Sometimes  the  omission  escapes  attention  when 
the  next  assessment  is  made. 

There  is  no  reason  why  the  county  court,  after  notice  to  the 
owner,  should  not  be  permitted  at  any  time  to  place  the  proper 
value  upon  such  omitted  property  and  by  its  order  of  record 
direct  it  to  be  placed  as  an  additional  assessment  upon  the  tax 
books.  There  is  very  little  danger  of  injustice  to  the  tax-payer 
if  he  is  first  notified  of  the  intention  to  assess  his  property  and 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  23 

to  add  it  to  the  tax  books,  and  an  opportunity  is  given  him  to 
be  heard  in  regard  thereto. 

The  purpose  of  the  law  is  to  reach  all  property  that  is  sub- 
ject to  taxation,  and  every  facility  to  accomplish  that  result 
should  be  provided.  The  mere  fact  that  the  assessor  overlooks 
it  need  not  prevent  its  assessment  by_  the  county  board  of  equali- 
zation, or  even  subsequently  by  the  county  court,  and  the  law 
can  provide  for  such  cases,  and  should  do  so. 

PUBLICATION  OF  ASSESSMENT  LISTS. 

The  publication  of  assessment  lists  prior  to  the  meeting  of 
the  county  board  of  equalization  would  have  a  good  effect.  It 
would  direct  attention  to  the  manner  in  which  property  had  been 
assessed,  and  would  enable  each  tax-payer  to  compare  his  own 
assessment  with  that  of  his  neighbors. 

The  assessor  would  probably  be  more  careful  in  his  work 
if  he  knew  that  it  was  to  be  criticised  and  examined  in  each 
neighborhood  of  his  county. 

Property,  too,  that  escapes  taxation  would  more  likely  find 
a  place  upon  the  tax  books  if  it  was  understood  that  publicity 
would  be  given  to  the  assessment  lists. 

Every  citizen  has  the  right  to  know  that  others  are  paying 
their  due  proportion  of  the  taxes.  His  own  burdens  are  in- 
creased unless  others  pay  their  shares. 

The  general  discussion  of  the  lists  in  the  neighborhood 
would  tend  to  create  public  sentiment  and  would  induce  better 
assessments.  Under  the  present  system  the  public  has  no  way 
of  making  an  investigation  unless  each  individual  tax-payer 
goes  to  the  county  seat  and  examines  the  assessor's  book. 

The  following  language  from  the  address  of  ex-President 
Harrison,  hereinbefore  referred  to,  may  be  appropriately  quoted 
here: 

"We  have  too  much  treated  the  matter  of  a  man's  tax  return 
as  a  personal  matter.  We  have  put  his  transactions  with  the 
State  on  much  the  same  level  with  his  transactions  with  his 
banker,  but  that  is  not  the  true  basis.  Each  citizen  has  a  per- 
sonal interest,  a  pecuniary  interest,  in  the  tax  return  of  his 
neighbor.  We  are  members  of  a  great  partnership,  and  it  is 


24  Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 

the  right  of  each  to  know  what  every  other  member  is  contribut- 
ing to  the  partnership  and  what  he  is  taking  from  it.  It  is  not 
a  private  affair ;  but  a  public  concern  of  the  first  importance. ' ' 

If  such  a  publication  should  be  made,  it  should  be  so  as  to 
give  the  widest  possible  notice  of  the  contents  of  these  lists. 

Johnson  county,  just  prior  to  the  assessment  in  June,  1901, 
adopted  the  plan  of  publishing  the  total  personal  assessment 
of  each  tax-payer  for  the  preceding  year.  The  same  thing  was 
done  just  prior  to  the  assessment  in  1902.  The  first  publication 
cost  $250  and  the  second  $150. 

C.  A.  Broyles,  Esq.,  the  county  clerk  of  that  county,  kindly 
furnished  the  Commission  with  the  following  statement : 

"The  figures  below  give  the  value  of  our  'personal  prop- 
erty' for  four  years  back  and  you  may  draw  your  own  con- 
clusion, towit: 

Aggregate  value  as  of  June  1,  1899 $2,319,125 

Aggregate  value  as  of  June  1,  1900 2,367,958 

Aggregate  value  as  of  June  1,  1901 2,599,035 

Aggregate  value  as  of  June  1,  1902 2,723,190 " 

The  only  question  about  the  publication  of  such  lists  is  the 
matter  of  expense,  which  will  depend  upon  conditions  in  each 
county.  It  would  probably  be  best  for  the  statute  to  authorize 
the  county  court  to  publish  such  lists  a  month  before  the  meet- 
ing of  the  county  board  of  equalization,  provided  the  aggregate 
cost  will  not  exceed  a  certain  amount  to  be  fixed  by  law,  and  then 
leave  the  matter  of  publication  to  the  discretion  of  the  county 
court. 

TIME  OF  ASSESSMENT  AND  COLLECTION  OF  TAXES. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  delay  of  from  fifteen  to 
eighteen  months  between  the  assessment  and  the  collection  of 
taxes  results  in  a  considerable  loss  of  revenue,  through  removals 
and  other  causes.  The  Commission  believes  that  it  is  desirable 
to  have  the  assessments  and  collections  made  during  the  same 
year.  If,  upon  further  investigation,  this  plan  is  found  practi- 
cable, a  bill  for  that  purpose  will  be  submitted. 

FRANCHISES. 

The  franchises  of  public  service  corporations,  under  the 
laws  of  this  State,  are  valued  in  connection  with  other  corporate 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission.  2& 

property.  This  practice  was  adopted  by  resolution  of  the  State 
Board  of  Equalization  in  1898  and  its  action  has  been  upheld 
by  the  courts  as  a  proper  construction  of  the  statute.  The  rule 
of  assessing  franchises  as  a  part  of  the  corporate  porperty  has 
ever  since  been  followed,  and  is  now  incorporated  in  the  statute 
specially  enacted  upon  that  subject. 

Tax  commissions  of  other  states  have  gone  very  fully  into 
the  question  of  the  best  method  of  reaching  such  property.  Mis- 
souri has  a  settled  rule  upon  the  subject,  which  is  manifestly 
fair  and  proceeds  upon  a  proper  principle.  The  property  of  a 
public  service  corporation,  tangible  and  intangible,  is  treated  as 
an  entity— the  property  of  a  going  concern.  Its  entire  value  is 
made  up— not  from  what  its  tangible  property  is  worth  distinct 
from  its  franchises,  nor  from  what  its  franchises  are  worth  dis- 
connected from  its  tangible  property. 

The  purpose  of  the  law  is  to  ascertain  the  value  of  the  tan- 
gible and  intangible  property,  taken  in  connection,  and  for  the 
purposes  for  which  the  same  may  be  used. 

It  is  not  the  rails,  cars  and  power  houses  of  a  street  rail- 
road, together  with  its  other  physical  property,  that  form  its 
value,  but  the  entire  plant  as  a  whole,  including  its  tangible  and 
intangible  property.  All  the  franchises,  privileges  and  rights 
which  it  enjoys  should  be  taken  into  consideration  by  the  asses- 
sing board,  and  our  laws  so  provide.  So  also  with  other  fran- 
chise-holding corporations. 

The  statute  is  based  upon  the  principle  that  whatever  prop- 
erty is  worth  for  sale  upon  the  market  should  be  taken  as  its 
value  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  its  assessment  for  taxable 
purposes.  This  is  the  rule  as  to  all  other  property,  and  is  ap- 
plicable here.  Our  laws  follow  the  principle  laid  down  by  Jus- 
tice Brewer  when  he  says : 

"Now,  it  is  a  cardinal  rule,  which  should  never  be  forgot- 
ten, that  whatever  property  is  worth  for  the  purposes  of  income 
and  sale  it  is  also  worth  for  purposes  of  taxation. " 

"Substance  of  right  demands  that  whatever  be  the  real 
value  of  any  property,  that  value  may  be  accepted  by  the  state 
for  the  purpose  of  taxation,  and  this  ought  not  to  be  evaded  by 
any  mere  confusion  of  words. ' ' 

Our  statutes  are  sufficient  to  subject  franchises  to  taxation. 


"26  Report  of  the  State  Ta.r  Commission. 


DELINQUENT  TAXES. 

The  method  of  collecting  delinquent  taxes  upon  real  estate 
now  in  force  has  proved  very  effective.  Sales  under  the  pro- 
visions of  the  statutes  are  upheld  by  the  courts.  Suits  must  be 
instituted  and  prosecuted  to  judgment  in  the  same  manner  as 
in  other  actions  to  subject  real  estate  to  ordinary  liens. 

There  are  some  amendments  that  can  be  made  to  the  pro- 
cedure by  which  it  may  be  shortened  and  simplified,  and  the  costs 
lessened  without  affecting  the  substantial  rights  of  the  property 
owner.  Amendments  of  this  kind  will  be  presented. 

MUNICIPAL  TAXES. 

Under  our  present  law  provision  is  made  for  the  separate 
assessment  and  collection  of  municipal  taxes.  No  good  reason 
is  perceived  for  this  additional  expense  in  cities  of  the  fourth 
class  and  villages,  and  possibly  in  larger  cities.  The  assessment 
cannot  be  higher  for  municipal  purposes  than  for  state  and 
county  purposes. 

The  expense  of  making  out  a  separate  tax  book  is  consider- 
able, and  the  collection  of  such  taxes  is  frequently  inefficient,  and 
is  attended  with  more  or  less  annoyance  and  inconvenience  to 
the  tax-payer,  who  should  be  permitted  to  pay  all  his  taxes  at 
one  tune  and  place,  as  far  as  possible.  So,  too,  an  examination 
of  one  set  of  books  should  be  sufficient  to  enable  an  interested 
party  to  determine  whether  the  taxes  upon  a  particular  piece 
of  property  have  been  paid,  without  having  to  go  to  different 
officers  to  ascertain  that  fact. 

It  would  be  much  more  simple  and  less  expensive  f\pr  these 
municipalities  to  adopt  the  same  plan  as  is  now  carried  out  in 
reference  to  school  districts.  The  municipal  officers  could  fix 
their  tax  levy  and  certify  it  to  the  county  clerk.  It  could  then  be 
extended  on  the  general  tax  books  and  the  tax-payer  could  pay 
all  of  his  taxes  to  the  county  collector  at  once.  The  county  as- 
sessor in  taking  the  personal  assessments  could  note  the  resi- 
dents of  the  cities  and  villages,  and  the  real  estate  book  would 
show  the  real  pr'operty  in  such  municipalities. 


Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission.  27 

CAB  COMPANIES  AND  FAST  FREIGHT  LINES. 

A  proper  statute  should  be  enacted  for  the  taxation  for 
county  and  local  purposes,  as  well  as  for  state  purposes,  of  stock 
cars,  furniture  cars,  fruit  cars,  tank  cars,  refrigerator  cars,  and 
all  other  kinds  of  cars  not  owned  by  railroad  companies,  and 
which  are  used  a  part  of  the  time  at  least  in  this  State. 

CORPORATION  LICENSES. 

Business  corporations  may  be  organized  in  this  State  under 
the  general  law. 

The  Constitution  requires  the  payment  at  the  time  of  the 
creation  of  the  corporation  of  a  fee  of  fifty  dollars  for  the  first 
fifty  thousand  dollars  of  stock  and  the  further  sum  of  five  dol- 
lars for  every  additional  ten  thousand  dollars  of  stock. 

The  statutes  permit  a  corporation  so  organized  to  continue 
in  existence  for  fifty  years.  "  Corporate  capacity  is  a  fran- 
chise. "  The  State  confers  this  franchise  and  may  properly 
charge  therefor.  The  stockholders,  by  virtue  of  the  incorpora- 
tion, acquire  by  grant  from  the  State  charter  rights  not  pos- 
sessed by  other  individuals.  Personal  liability  for  the  debts  of 
the  concern  is  avoided,  and  continuity  of  joint  property  interests 
is  secured. 

The  privilege  of  corporate  existence  adds  much  to  the  value 
of  the  shareholder's  property. 

A  corporation  with  a  capital  of  fifty  thousand  dollars  may, 
under  the  laws  as  they  now  stand,  continue  for  fifty  years  upon 
the  advance  payment  of  fifty  dollars— that  is,  one  dollar  a  year. 
The  privilege  is  worth  more  than  this. 

The  vast  number  of  corporations  organized  in  the  State 
shows  that  the  fee  paid  is  not  burdensome.  Corporations  may 
be  found  everywhere  and  they  are  organized  for  almost  every 
purpose. 

A  reasonable  annual  exaction  may  justly  be  required  in  ad- 
dition to  the  amount  now  paid.  This  need  not  be  large  or  bur- 
densome and  no  doubt  will  be  cheerfully  paid  by  those  who  de- 
sire the  continuance  of  corporate  privileges,  granted  by  the 
State. 


28  Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission. 


LICENSES  FOE  THE  SALE  OF  INTOXICATING  LIQUORS. 

License  fees  for  the  privilege  of  selling  intoxicating  liquors 
are  not  strictly  speaking  a  feature  of  the  revenue  system  of  the 
State,  but  are  collected  as  an  incident  to  the  regulation  of  the 
business  under  the  police  power.  Nevertheless  considerable 
revenue  accrues  to  the  State  therefrom,  and  hence  the  subject 
may  be  properly  discussed  here. 

The  State  under  the  high  license  law  requires  every  dram- 
shop keeper  to  procure  a  license,  and  fixes  the  amount  that  shall 
be  paid  therefor. 

An  inspection  fee  is  also  exacted  under  the  "Beer  Inspec- 
tion Law"  for  all  beer  which  the  State  permits  to  be  sold  for 
consumption  within  its  borders. 

A  license  fee  should  also  be  required  from  wholesale  dealers 
in  alcoholic  liquors,  so  as  to  put  them  upon  an  equality  with 
the  brewers.  Dramshop  keepers  are  required  to  pay  a  license 
fee  for  the  privilege  of  carrying  on  their  business,  and  are  sub- 
ject to  other  police  regulations  prescribed  by  the  statutes.  It 
is  a  well-known  fact  that  many  so-called  drug  stores  are  dram- 
shops in  disguise,  and  in  truth  there  is  not  much  disguise,  in 
some  instances,  about  the  purpose  of  their  existence. 

The  parties  conducting  these  places  pay  nothing  for  the 
privilege  of  selling  intoxicating  liquors,  and  are  subject  to  no 
police  regulations  at  all.  This  is  not  only  unfair  to  the  dram- 
shop keeper,^  who  pays  for  his  license,  but  is  unjust  to  the  tax- 
payers of  the  State. 

Such  places  are  breeders  of  disorder  and  frequently  of 
crime,  and  it  may  be  said  that  the  criminal  costs  are  largely 
augmented  on  account  of  their  existence. 

Experience  demonstrates  that  it  is  practically  impossible 
to  eradicate  this  evil. 

There  are  many  drug  stores  where  liquor  cannot  be  ob- 
tained except  upon  a  physician's  prescription,  as  required  by 
law.  There  are  other  places  where  drugs  are  kept  simply  as  an 
excuse  for  the  sale  of  whiskey. 

All  efforts  to  break  up  this  illicit  business  by  criminal  prose- 
cutions have  failed. 


Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission.  29 

Dramshop  keepers  pay  a  license  of  at  least  one  hundred  dol- 
lars a  year  to  the  State,  and  a  much  larger  sum  to  the  county 
and  city  for  the  privilege  which  the  State  grants  them. 

In  order  to  reach  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  in  small 
quantities  by  parties  other  than  dramshop  keepers,  the  only 
effectual  method  the  Commission  can  suggest  is  to  require  a 
license  from  all  such  retail  dealers.  It  should  be  provided  that 
no  person,  other  than  a  dramshop  keeper,  shall  be  permitted 
to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  by  retail  for  any  purpose  without 
first  obtaining  a  retail  liquor  dealer 's  license,  for  which  a  fee 
should  be  paid  to  the  State.  The  fee  need  not  be  high  or  so 
great  as  that  required  from  dramshop  keepers. 

This  would  tend  in  some  measure  to  weed  out  the  so-called 
drug  stores  and  assist  in  paying  the  criminal  costs  incurred  by 
the  State  in  consequence  of  the  continued  existence  of  others 
of  the  same  kind.  The  law  to  be  effective  will  have  to  be  general 
and  apply  to  all  retail  liquor  dealers. 

TAXATION  OF  MORTGAGES. 

A  plan  for  the  taxation  of  mortgages  has  been  suggested  in 
New  York.  It  was  proposed  to  levy  a  flat  rate  as  an  excise 
duty  or  tax  for  state  purposes  upon  all  mortgages  filed  for 
record,  and  to  collect  the  same  through  the  recorder's  office 
as  a  condition  precedent  to  filing  the  same  for  record.  This  fee, 
license  or  duty  was  to  be  in  lieu  of  all  other  taxes  upon  such 
mortgages.  The  plan  cannot  be  adopted  here  without  consti- 
tutional changes. 

STATISTICS. 

An  earnest  effort  was  made  by  the  Commission  to  obtain 
from  the  different  counties  statistical  reports  concerning  various 
subjects  relating  to  taxation.  Blanks  were  prepared  and  for- 
warded to  the  different  county  officers.  Many  failed  to  respond 
to  these  inquiries,  and  the  information  furnished  by  others  was 
so  meager  that  it  is  impossible  to  make  a  table  that  will  be  of 
any  practical  value. 

The  officers  of  about  thirty  counties,  however,  made  full 
and  complete  reports  and  we  take  pleasure  in  acknowledging  our 

IK! 


30  Report  of  the  State  Ta.r  Commission. 

obligation  to  these  officers  for  their  efforts  to  assist  the  Com- 
mission in  its  work. 

Reports  were  received,  however,  from  many  counties  in  an- 
swer to  the  one  inquiry  concerning  the  proportion  of  the  assessed 
value  of  the  different  classes  of  property  to  the  real  value 
thereof,  as  stated  in  the  first  part  of  this  report,  and  appears  in 
a  table  in  the  appendix. 

COMPILATION  OF  TAX  LAWS  AND  DECISIONS. 

The  act  creating  the  commission  directs  the  compilation  of 
all  the  revenue  laws  of  the  State  and  the  decisions  construing 
the  same,  which  is  to  be  published  under  the  supervision  of  the 
Commission.  This  publication  cannot  be  made  until  the  close  of 
the  present  session  of  the  General  Assembly,  as  the  acts  passed 
by  it  should  be  incorporated  therein,  but  will  be  prepared  for  dis- 
tribution at  that  time  as  required  by  the  statute. 

BILLS  TO  BE  SUBMITTED. 

The  Commission  will  submit  bills  for  the  consideration  of 
the  General  Assembly,  embodying  the  recommendations  made 
herein  and  other  minor  amendments  to  the  revenue  laws,  refer- 
ence to  which  is  deemed  unnecessary  in  this  report. 
All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

W.  M.  WILLIAMS, 
E.  C.  CROW, 
PEYTON  A.  PARKS, 

State  Tax  Commission. 
Jefferson  City,  Mo.,  February  7th,  1903. 


APPENDIX. 


TABLE  SHOWING  THE  EFFECT  UPON  THE  REVENUE 
OF  THE  STATE  AND  THE  VARIOUS  COUNTIES  OF  A 
RELEASE  OF  THE  STATE  TAX  UPON  REAL  ANI> 
PERSONAL  PROPERTY  AND  THE  APPROPRIATION 
OF  ALL  TAXES  UPON  RAILROADS  AND  SIMILAR 
CORPORATIONS  TO  STATE  PURPOSES. 


Counties. 

Tax  surrendered  by  State. 

Faxes  surreuder'd  by  counties 

State  interest  tax. 

Revenue  tax  on 
real  and  per- 
sonal property. 

Revenue  tax  on 
merchants'  li- 
cense   

Total  

Railroad,  bridge, 
telegraph  and 
telephone  tax.. 

Insurance  tax... 

Total  

Real  and  per- 
sonal property. 

Merchants'  li- 
cense tax  

Adair 

$7,386  29 
9,406  06 
12,668  27 
12,009  00 
5,  568  81 
7,286  90 
12,469  57 
5,166  22 
3,  153  63 
12,234  39 
41,325  69 
4,264  00 
7,909  78 
8,941  23 
2,455  65 
7,  495  39 
11,548  32 
1,751  80 
11,658  87 
5,466  91 
11,193  71 
4,462  27 
5,905  22 
8,948  60 
9,623  15 
6,400  45 
10,042  13 
3,741  58 
5,044  56 
2,940  86 
10,526  25 
7,371  00 
3,181  68 
2,667  13 
4,870  67 
9,  386  03 
5,165  45 
9,224  13 
18,002  90 
7,389  81 
11,319  64 
11,041  38 
3,111  79 
9,538  34 
8,032  19 
4,435  71 
2,777  00 
135,  762  00 
23,  672  48 
7  565  05 

$221  05 
227  37 
227  77 
323  94 
244  18 
197  21 
440  77 
170  21 
194  08 
398  24 
4,791  17 
469  59 
249  3(> 
274  28 
97  20 
392  13 
344  88 
64  03 
28000 
196  10 
221  69 
227  71 
96  96 
232  49 
182  09 
567  74 
294  95 
123  11 
148  9] 
148  43 
313  70 
219  18 
214  43 
100  52 
435  09 
326  20 
278  64 
325  58 
1,  669  41 
247  80 
409  96 
410  62 
127  75 
378  49 
224  12 
245  91 
164  95 
10,495  80 
1,106  48 
253  45 

$7,607  34 
9,633  43 
12,896  04 
12,  332  94 
5,  752  99 
7,484  11 
12,910  34 
5,336  43 
3,347  71 
12,632  63 
46,116  86 
4,  733  59 
8,  159  08 
9,215  51 
2,552  85 
7,887  52 
11,893  20 
1,815  83 
11,938  87 
5,663  01 
11,420  43 
4,689  98 
6,002  17 
9,181  09 
9,805  24 
6.96S  19 
10,337  08 
3,86i  69 
5,193  47 
3,089  29 
10,839  95 
7,590  18 
3,391  11 
2,  767  65 
5,305  76 
9,71223 
5,  444  09 
9,549  71 
19,672  31 
7,637  61 
11,  759  60 
11,452  00 
3,239  54 
9,916  83 
8,256  31 
4,681  62 
2,941  95 
146,257  80 
24,778  96 
7  818  50 

$8,920  82 
6,687  45 
4,635  91 
10,884  76 
6,464  67 
10,  120  74 
13,717  18 
2,  054  04 
3,09?  59 
10,633  88 
33,382  27 
11,355  91 
8,070  56 
12,976  82 
482  £0 
4,977  23 
16,952  87 
3,555  82 
30,384  66 
113  88 
12,894  40 
2,496  59 
12,312  16 
17.844  52 
20,229  83 
7,571  19 
10.166  21 
5,017  7? 
7,919  98 
1  54 
10,998  23 
7,539  96 
703  01 

$1,082  52 
857  75 
818  96 
1,097  77 
1,408  75 
985  13 
1,566  11 
8P6  71 
881  81 
1,448  88 
6,908  05 
1,004  61 
813  04 
1,217  68 
724  95 
1,381  98 
1,328  62 
345  36 
1,210  56 
893  99 
1,465  15 
978  35 
729  19 
995  12 
829  46 
1,01358 
1,149  59 
731  56 
916  52 
792  03 
1,068  12 
708  69 
733  25 
963  95 
1,517  83 
1,70262 
734  10 
1,014  26 
2,743  64 
901  28 
1,238  52 
1,431  27 
582  16 
897  72 
928  55 
1,165  01 
501  71 
11,962  57 
3,947  10 
1,450  92 

$10.  COS  34 
7,545  20 
5,454  87 
11,982  5d 
7,873  42 
11,105  87 
15,2i-3  29 
2,950  75 
3,979  40 
12,082  76 
40,240  32 
12,360  52 
8,883  60 
14,194  50 
1,207  45 
6,359  21 
18,281  49 
3,901  18 
31,595  22 
1,007  87 
14,359  55 
3.474  94 
13,041  35 
18,839  64 
21,059  29 
8,584  77 
11,315  80 
5,749  33 
8,836  50 
793  54 
12,066  35 
8,248  65 
1,436  26 
963  95 
4,093  16 
17,642  20 
4,554  12 
3,983  16 
28,879  43 
13,309  44 
4,698  94 
15,961  76 
1,064  35 
9,297  03 
11,324  82 
9,012  24 
6,222  88 
225,368  71 
36,273  76 
11,739  61 

$4,924  18 
6.270  9t 
8,445  52 
8,006  00 
3,672  53 
4,857  93 
8,313  11 
3,444  17 
2,102  40 
8.  156  27 
27.550  46 
2,842  65 
5,273  19 
5,690  82 
1,637  10 
4,996  93 
7,707  53 
1,167  87 
7,  772  58 
3,644  63 
7,465  81 
2,974  85 
3,936  81 
5,965  73 
6,415  40 
4,266  97 
6,694  75 
2,494  36 
3,363  05 
1,960  56 
7,034  48 
4,913  97 
2.121  03 
1,778  47 
3,240  46 
6,257  35 
3,443  66 
6,149  42 
12,001  97 
4,926  53 
7,566  44 
7,360  90 
2,080  52 
6,358  90 
5,354  79 
2,957  13 
1,851  35 
90,508  06 
15,781  66 
5  043  36 

$147  37 
151  58 
151  86- 
215  9o 
162  70 
131  43 
293  84 
113  48- 
129  40 
265  49 
3,194  11 
313  07 
166  20 
182  86 
64  80 
261  42 
229  92 
42  68 
186  67 
130  74 
147  80 
151  SO 
64  63 
154  99 
121  37 
378  48 
196  64 
82  07 
99  27 
98  96 
209  14 
146  12 
142  95 
49  93 
280  04 
217  47 
185  76 
217  05 
1,112  95 
165  20 
273  31 
273  34 
85  16 
25233 
149  41 
163  94 
109  97 
6,997  20 
737  65 
168  88 

Andrew  
Atchison  
Audrain  
Barry  
Barton  
Bates  . 

Benton  
Bollinger  
Boone  

Buchanan  — 
Butler. 

Caldwell  
Callaway  
Camden  

0.  Girardeau 
Carroll  
Carter... 

Cass 

Cedar  
Chariton  
Christian  
Clark  

Clay  
Clinton. 

Cole 

Cooper  
Crawford  — 
Dade  
Dallas.. 

Daviess  
DeKalb  
Dent 

Douglas  
Dunklin  
Franklin  
Gasconade... 
Gentry  
Greene  
Grundy  
Harrison  
Henry  
Hickory  
Holt. 

2,575  33 
15,  939  58 
3,820  02 
2,968  90 
26,135  79 
12,408  16 
3,460  42 
14,530  49 
482  19 
8,399  31 
10,396  27 
7,847  23 
5,721  17 
223,406  14 
32,320  66 
10,288  69 

Howard..  . 
Howell  
Iron 

Jackson  
Jasoer  
Jefferson  

Report  of  flic  State  Ta.v  Commission. 


TABLE  SHOWING  THE  EFFECT  UPON  THE  REVENUE  OF  THE  STATE  AND  THE  VA- 
RIOUS COUNTIES  OF  A  RELEASE  OF  THE  STATE  TAX  UPON  REAL  AND  PER- 
SONAL PROPERTY  AND  THE  APPROPRIATION  OF  ALL  TAXES  UPON  RAILROADS 
AND  SIMILAR  CORPORATIONS  TO  STATE  PURPOSES-Continued. 


Counties. 

Tax  surrendered  by  State. 

Taxes  surrender'd  by  counties 

State  interest  tax. 

£3* 
g£3 

1|§ 

o 
Si 

§§! 

•B 

ff£ 

H 

til 

CD  CD  ^ 
•OK  O 

SIS 

tars- 
CD  9& 

ssl 

:  a® 

M 

B 

X 

ft 

a 
§ 

* 

| 

if 

fs 

II 

oS 
o>  a 

a  *t 

h 

S' 

X  3 
!    C* 
'    **•* 

'•   T 

..  J  ohnson  — 
Knox  
;Laclede  
Lafayette... 
Lawrence.... 
Lewis  

$14,461  9( 
5,647  It 
4,403  V 
14,326  14 
8,  393  95 
6,878  31 
7,006  68 
8,857  65 
8,645  H4 
2,538  94 
13,508  62 
2,565  39 
2,540  47 
11,315  33 
6,083  86 
3,681  99 
3.843  12 
5.883  70 
8,  960  48 
6,391  4? 
3,  697  15 
3,318  08 
7,493  17 
17,088  80 
2,  836  50 
4,878  01 
1,794  25 
3,763  3b 
4,498  38 
14.994  80 
3,265  53 
10,803  2& 
7,553  18 
6,313  4b 
2,212  85 
5,822  03 
5,932  97 
8,756  22 
10,966  22 
2<341  31 
3,02376 
13,981  47 
5,281  95 
7,726  88 
3,147  05 
41,463  75 
16,  798  90 
3,951  99 
5,381  24 
5.096  71 
2,812  55 
7,580  74 
5,450  87 
2,  179  68 
6,  786  11 
1,817  91 
4,501  76 
12,210  59 
4,209  52 
3,  778  52 
2,932  09 
4,082  75 
4,574  65 
3,655  29 
581,661  54 

1,581,737  41 

>       $375  9 
>          96  8 
173  90 
i        553  14 
331  85 
21900 
191  16 
466  72 
278  62 
146  19 
398  13 
169  32 
88  19 
358  05 
154  63 
187  46 
180  85 
366  37 
197  31 
259  30 
105  85 
214  08 
384  83 
394  82 
111  55 
173  28 
78  58 
33508 
269  14 
444  59 
158  76 
417  01 
164  69 
297  81 
142  85 
140  14 
82  33 
351  70 
236  92 
80  21 
289  86 
592  34 
163  00 
352  21 
144  08 
375  65 
464  96 
105  40 
162  52 
166  25 
120  44 
228  07 
468  32 
45  78 
443  30 
71  95 
165  07 
377  30 
116  61 
121  38 
397  44 
181  14 
165  83 
185  13 
64,934  10 

110,610  99 

$14,837  8 
5,744  02 
4,  577  0 
14,879  2S 
8,725  T 
7,097  31 
7,197  84 
9,324  3" 
8,924  41 
2,685  13 
13,906  75 
2,734  71 
2,628  66 
11,673  38 
6,238  49 
d,869  45 
4,023  97 
6,250  07 
9,  157  79 
6,650  73 
3,803  00 
3,532  16 
7,878  00 
17,483  62 
2,948  05 
5,051  29 
1,873  83 
4,098  41 
4,767  52 
15,439  39 
3,  424  29 
11,220  29 
7,717  87 
6,611  27 
2,355  70 
5,962  17 
6,015  30 
9,107  92 
11,203  14 
2,421  52 
3,313  62 
14,573  81 
5,444  95 
8,079  09 
3,291  13 
41,839  40 
17,263  86 
4,057  39 
5,543  76 
5,262  96 
2,932  99 
7,  SOS  81 
5,919  19 
2,225  46 
7,229  41 
1,889  86 
4,666  83 
12,587  89 
4,326  13 
3,899  90 
3,329  53 
4,263  89 
4,740  48 
3,840  42 
646,595  64 

,692,348  40 

$9,901  87 
•      5,694  3f 
6,829  72 
17,367  2£ 
6,  784  94 
5,758  20 
7,092  96 
10,611  88 
12,616  72 
3,027  65 
15,102  77 
3,114  59 

$1,379  44 
658  22 
933  12 
1,688  73 
1,531  21 
806  93 
951  08 
1,256  30 
1,081  67 
797  79 
1,629  45 
639  75 
540  67 
1,379  61 
746  80 
935  49 
602  15 
842  50 
944  81 
830  48 
389  38 
759  68 
1,533  92 
1,699  57 
798  63 
840  64 
702  09 
766  11 
853  68 
1,715  50 
822  35 
1,239  20 
796  94 
1,287  30 
622  31 
895  61 
599  78 
1,476  67 
1,268  16 
474  95 
847  92 
1,307  29 
968  18 
1,432  97 
614  52 
2,639  47 
1,812  89 
576  07 
654  32 
811  OOi 
606  89 
828  11 
1,514  10! 
537  28! 
1,062  19| 
562  6l)i 
1,231  76 
1,626  91 
536  43 
788  47 
911  10 
974  28 
520  681 
1,063  38 
27,097  32 

164,212  34 

$11,281  31 
6,352  61 
7.  762  84 
19,  055  98 
8,316  15 
6,565  13 
8,044  04 
11,868  18 
13,698  39 
3,825  44 
16,  732  22 
3,  754  34 
540  67 
20,340  96 
6,516  66 
2,023  97 
8,001  22 
7,083  24 
7,513  95 
7,895  33 
4,254  91 
6,116  01 
8,893  78 
15,700  79 
3,511  35 
5,114  78 
702  09 
2,369  80 
1,249  22 
21,923  88 
7,434  91 
16,737  32 
15,125  92 
3,650  54 
3,163  94 
4,822  37 
10,479  43 
20,835  92 
15,623  23 
1,330  70 
2,067  66 
18,482  85 
7,512  53 
9,610  64 
880  03 
42,346  99 
13,600  18 
7,338  05 
7,100  72 
6,376  64: 
2,567  24; 
5,  105  63 
10,694  92 
537  28 
8,680  89: 
563  29 
4,315  39 
20,404  33 
6,750  18| 
4,640  77 
10,  835  70 
7,063  73 
3,196  06 
5,572  87; 
539,792  40 

$9,641  30 
3,764  75 
2,934  79 
9,550  76 
5,  595  95 
4,585  57 
4,671  04 
5,905  10 
5,  747  96 
1,691  47 
9,005  74 
1,710  26 
1,  693  64 
7,  543  82 
4,055  91 
2,  454  65 
2,562  11 
3,  922  48 
5,973  69 
4,  260  95 
2,464  76 
2,212  08 
4,995  44 
11,392  54 
1,890  98 
3,252  00 
1,196  16 
2,508  87 
2,998  92 
9,998  10 
2,176  98 
7,202  20 
5,  035  06 
4,  208  93 
1,475  23 
3,881  36 
3,955  35 
5,837  48 
7,310  80 
1,560  87 
2,015  85 
9,320  95 
3,521  32 
5,  151  25 
2.098  03 
27,642  50 
11,199  27 
2,634  65 
3,  587  48 
3,397  80 
1,875  03 
5,050  47 
3,633  91i 
1,453  13| 
4,  524  061 
1,211  94 
3,001  18 
8,  140  39 
2,  806  35| 
2,519  02 
1,954  73 
2,721  83 
3,049  78 
7,  436  98! 
387,774  36i 

$250  60 
64  57 
115  93 
368  76 
221  23 
146  02 
127  44 
311  15 
185  74 
97  45 
265  42 
112  88 
58  79 
238  70 
163  10 
116  96 
120  57 
244  26 
131  54 
172  87 
70  56 
142  71 
256  54 
263  21 
74  37 
115  52 
52  39 
223  39 
179  43 
296  39 
105  84 
278  01 
109  78 
198  53 
95  24 
93  42 
54  89 
234  47 
157  95 
53  43 
193  24 
394  90 
108  65 
T34  80 
96  05 
250  42 
309  97 
70  26 
108  36 
110  87 
80  29 
151  97 
312  20 
30  52 
295  53 
47  98 
110  05 
251  54 
77  74 
80  92 
264  96 
120  76 
110  56 
123  42 
i3,289  40 

Lincoln  
•Linn  

Livingston.. 
McDonald... 
Macon  
Madison  
Maries  
Marion  
Mercer 
Miller  
Mississippi  .. 
Moniteau  — 
Monroe  
Montgomery 
Morgan  
New  Madrid. 
Newton  
Nodaway  — 
Oregon  
Osage 

18,961  35 
5,  769  86 
1,088  48 
7.399  07 
6,240  74 
6,569  14 
7,064  85 
3,565  58 
5.356  33 
7,359  86 
14,001  22 
2,712  72 
4,274  14 

Ozark  
Pemiscot  — 
Perry  
Pettis.. 

1,603  69 
395  54 
20,208  38 
6,612  56 
15,498  12 
14,328  98 
2,363  24 
2,541  63 
3,927  36 
9,879  65 
19,359  25 
14,355  07 
855  75 
1,219  74 
17,  175  56 
6,544  35 
8,177  67 
265  51 
39,707  52 
11,787  29 
6,761  9b 
6,446  40 
5,565  64 
1,960  35 
4,277  52 
9,180  82 

Phelps.  . 

Pike.. 

Platte..  .. 
Polk.. 

Pulaski  

Putnam.. 

Rails  
•Randolph.... 
Ray  
Reynolds.... 
Ripley  
St.  Charles.. 
St.  Olair  
St.  Francois. 
S.  Genevieve 
St.  Louis.... 
Saline  
Schuyler  — 
Scotland  
Scott 

Shannon  
Shelby  
Stoddard  .... 
Stone 

Sullivan  
Taney  
"Texas 

7,618  70 
60 
3,082  63 
18,777  42 
6,213  75 
3,852  30 
9,924  60 
6,089  45 
2,fr75  38 
4,  509  49 
512,695  08 

,699,866  99 

Vernon  
Warren  
Washington. 
Wayne  
Webster  
Worth  
Wright  
•St.  Louis  city 

Totals... 

1,864,079  33 

L,  054,  563  88 

73,715  23 

Report  of  the  State  Ta.v  Commission. 


33 


ESTIMATED  PEIt  CENT.  OF  ASSESSED  VALUE  TO 
TRUE  VALUE. 


Counties. 

By  Assessors. 

By  County  Clerk 

By  Collector. 

<T> 

1 

Moneys,  notes, 
etc  

Other  personal 
property  

i 

1 

1 

»B! 

£§ 
1 

_w 
B 

I 

Other  personal 
property  

B 
i 
I 

Moneys,  notes, 
etc  

Other  personal 
property  

1.    Adair  

40 

65 

40 

2.    Andrew  

40 

60 
60 
60 

3     Barry  . 

40 

100 

40 

60 
40 
40 
50 

100 
60 
60 
100 

60 
40 
40 
50 

60 
60 

4.    Barton  

5.    Bates  

6.    Benton  

30 

100 

25 

40 
75 

50 
75 

7.    Bollinger  

8.    Boone  
9.    Buchanan 

50 
50 

75 
60 

33 

60 

50 

30 

50 

50 



30 

50 

10.     Butler  

11.    Oaldwell 

33% 
60 

100 
100 

33% 
60 

12     Callaway 

60 
75 

100 
100 

60 

80 

60 

60 

13.    Oamden.              

14  .    Oape  Girardeau    ,  

40 
75 

100 
100 

50 
75 

35 

25 

15.    Carter  

16.    Cass  

30 

30 
65 
40 
40 
65 
35 
40 

17.    Cedar.. 

65 

65 

65 

65 
40 

100 
100 

65 
40 

65 
40 
33 
40 

18      Chariton 

19.    Christian  . 

63 

100 

63 

20.    Clay  

21.    Clark  

30 
30 

75 
60 

35 
40 

30 
30 

"eo" 

22     Clinton 

30 
33% 
40 
50 
50 
40 

60 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 

30 
33% 
30 
50 
40 
40 

23.    Cooper    

24.    Dallas  

40 

65 

50 

25.    Dent  

26.    Gasconade  . 

27.    Gentry  

23  .    Greene 

60 

50 

25 

29      Henry 

40 
50 

100 
100 

40 
66% 

30 

70 

25 

30 



30.    Hickory 

31      Holt. 

40 

65 

30 

32.    Howard  

33 
50 
40 
40 
50 

65 
100 
65 
60 

66% 

30 
50 
50 
60 
50 

"46" 
40 

33     Howell  . 

75 

50 

40 

34.    Jackson  

35     Jasper 

36.    Johnson  

50 
25 
50 

63% 
104 
60 

50 
33% 
60 

50 

50 

37      Knox.  . 

38.    Laclede  

65 
40 

33% 
33% 
35 

65 
60 
100 
66% 
75 

50 
40 
40 
50 
35 

65 
33 

60 
50 

39.    Lafayette 

40.    Lawrence  
41.    Lewis.. 

42      Lincoln 

43.    Linn                                    

30 

33% 
50 

75 
70 
60 

40 
33% 
60 

44      Livingston 

45     McDonald 

33% 
50 
66% 
70 
40 
40 
60 

60 
100 
66% 
100 
65 
65 
81% 

33% 
50 
65 
60 
40 
40 
40 

46      Macon 

50 

50 

47     Madison 

48.    Maries 

75- 
40 
40 
60 
40 
35 
40 

75 

65 
65 
80 
75 
63 
100 

75 
40 
60 
50 
40 
40 
50 

75 
50 



75 
65 

49.    Marion  . 

51      Miller 

52.    Mississippi 

40 

60 

53     Monroe 

33 

40 
65 

63 
100 
90 

33 
50 
60 

33% 
50 
50 
50 
35 

50 
100 
65 
50 
66 

33% 
75 
50 
50 
66 

50 

65 

50 

58     Osage 

59.    Ozark 

66% 
35 
40 



75 
66 
40 

60     Perry 

61  .    Pettis 

40 

65 

50 

62     Phelps 

66% 

100 

66% 

63.    Pike... 

75 

100 

50 

{,,..  No  report.) 
P— 3 


34 


Report  of  the  State  Tax  Commission. 


ESTIMATED  PER  CENT.  OF  ASSESSED  VALUE  TO  TRUE  VALUE-Ooatinued. 


Counties. 

By  Assessor. 

By  County  Clerk 

By  Collector. 

Real  estate  

Moneys,  notes, 
etc  

Other  personal 
property  

Real  estate  — 

Moneys,  notes, 
etc  

Other  personal 
property  

Real  estate.... 

rf            if 

!  1         II 

i|.        ?§ 
if           is. 

64      Platte.                             

33% 

65 

33% 

33 
40 
33 

50 

50 

65      Pulaski 

60 
65 
100 

50 
50 
50 

40 

33% 

50 
50 

66     Putnam. 

67      Rails 

40 
40 
33% 

100 
40 
100 

40 

40 
35 

68      Randolph 

gq         Ray 

33% 
75 
95 
40 
40 

166 

100 
20 
70 
80 

40 
65 
40 

50 
50 

"75" 

"46" 

40 

65  " 

70      Reynolds 

71.    Ripley 

90 
40 

80 
65 

70 
50 

72     St   Olair 

50 

73      St   Francois 

50 

74      Ste    Genevieve.                '    ..  . 

40 
35 
33% 
50 

100 
65 
60 
65 

40 
50 
40 
75 

75.    Saline.                             

45 

65 

45 

45 

65 

70     Scotland                              

77     Scott                      .  .             .   ... 

66% 

65 

70 

78      Shannon 

80 

80 

79     Shelby                            

40 
33% 

65 
100 

40 

50 

33% 

33% 
33% 

65 

100 
65 

40 
50 
33% 

33% 
33% 

40 
50 

80.    Sullivan   

81      Vernon                         ... 

82.    Warren  
83.    Washington  

33 

100 

75       ....                  66?* 

84      Wayne 

65 

100 

65 

85     Webster 

65 

33% 
66 

70 

75 

100 
100 

70 

50 
50 
66 

70 

75 
33% 
66 

70 

75 

...  .;          50 

I               60 
(  1  per  cent. 
4       to 
(  100  per  cent. 

86      Worth.                      

33% 
66 

70 

100 
100 

70 

50 
6& 

70 

87     Wright 

City  of  St   Louis  > 

( —  No  report.) 


BILLS 
RECOMMENDED  BY  THE  COMMISSION. 


BILLS   PREPARED  AND  SUBMITTED  BY  THE  STATE 
TAX  COMMISSION. 


The  Commission,  as  stated  in  the  last  paragraph  of  the  re- 
port, prepared  and  submitted  to  the  Governor,  separate  bills, 
each  intended  to  carry  out  some  of  the  recommendations  and 
suggestions  made  in  the  report. 

The  bills  submitted  by  the  Commission  are  as  follows : 

AN  ACT 

To  amend  section  9139  of  article  II,  chapter  149  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of 
Missouri,  1899,  concerning  the  assessment  and  collection  of  the  revenue. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  Section  9139  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  1899, 
is  hereby  amended  by  striking  out  the  word  l  i  two, ' '  between  the 
words  "of "  and  " years,'7  in  the  fourth  line  of  said  section,  and 
inserting  the  word  "four"  in  lieu  thereof;  so  that  said  section,  as 
amended,  shall  read  as  follows : 

Section  9139.  Term  of  Office.— Assessors  elected  under  the 
provisions  of  this  chapter  shall  enter  upon  the  discharge  of 
their  duties  on  the  first  day  of  June  next  after  they  shall  have 
been  elected,  and  shall  hold  their  offices  for  the  term  of  four 
years,  and  until  their  successors  are  elected  and  qualified. 

AN  ACT 

To  authorize  the  publication  of  assessment  lists. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  The  county  court  of  each  county  in  this  State 
shall  have  power  to  cause  to  be  published  in  two  newspapers  of 
opposite  politics,  at  least  fifteen  days  before  the  meeting  of  the 


38  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

county  Board  of  Equalization  in  each  year,  an  alphabetical  list  of 
the  tax-payers  of  said  county,  arranged  by  municipal  townships, 
setting  out  the  name  of  the  tax-payer  and  the  total  amount  of  his 
personal  property,  as  shown  by  the  assessor's  books,  and  also,  in 
another  column,  the  total  amount  of  money,  notes  and  credits 
assessed  to  such  tax-payer  and  may  also  add  another  column  con- 
taining the  total  valuation  of  the  real  estate  of  each  tax-payer. 
Before  making  any  such  publication  such  county  court  shall  first 
ascertain  the  total  cost  of  such  publication  and  enter  into  a  con- 
tract therefor. 

Sec.  2.  Whenever  the  county  court  shall  make  an  order  for 
the  publication  of  such  list,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  county 
clerk  to  prepare  the  same  for  the  printer,  and  he  shall  receive 
such  compensation  therefor  as  the  county  court  may  allow. 

Sec.  3.  The  publisher  of  the  newspaper  in  which  said  list 
is  printed  shall  deliver  to  the  clerk  of  the  county  court  at  least 
two  copies  of  said  paper  for  each  school  district  in  said  county, 
without  extra  charge,  and  said  clerk  shall  immediately  mail  one 
copy  thereof  to  the  school  district  clerk  of  each  school  district 
in  said  county,  who  shall  have  the  same  present  at  the  annual 
school  meeting  thereof,  and  shall  preserve  it  with  the  records  of 
said  school  district  for  the  examination  and  inspection  of  all 
parties  interested  therein. 

Sec.  4.  The  word  "tax-payer"  shall  include  all  corpora- 
tions and  co-partnerships  as  well  as  natural  persons. 

Sec.  5.  -There  being  now  no  method  provided  for  the  publi- ' 
cation  of  such  lists  and  it  is  being  deemed  essential  by  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  that  said  list  should  be  published,  an  emergency 
is  hereby  declared  to  exist  within  the  meaning  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  this  act  shall  become  operative  from  and  after  its  pas- 
sage and  approval  by  the  Governor. 

AN  ACT 

Concerning  the;  assessment  and  taxation  of  money,  notes,  bonds  and  other 
evidences  of  debt,  and  corporate  stocks  assessable  under  the  laws  of  this 
state  to  the  stockholder. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.     The  county  assessor  of  each    county    in    this 

State,  and  the  proper  officer  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  shall  be  fur- 


Proposed  Tax  Laics.  39 

nished  with  suitable  blanks  for  the  assessment  and  return  for 
taxation  of  money,  notes,  bonds  and  other  evidences  of  debt,  and 
corporate  stocks  subject  under  the  laws  of  this  State  to  be  as- 
sessed to  the  stockholder,  and  said  lists  shall  be  separate  from 
those  prepared  for  the  return  for  assessment  of  other  property. 
The  blanks  shall  be  in  such  form  as  to  require  the  disclosure  by 
the  tax-payer  of  the  total  amount  of  money,  notes,  bonds  and 
other  evidences  of  debt,  and  also  of  corporate  stocks  owned  by 
him  at  the  date  of  the  assessment  and  subject  by  the  laws  of 
this  State  to  be  assessed  to  such  tax-payer,  and  shall  further 
state  the  nature  and  amount  of  such  property,  and  how  and 
where  secured,  and  whether,  if  of  record,  the  security  stands  in 
the  name  of  the  assessed  or  of  some  other  person  who  has  as- 
signed it  to  him.  Proper  blanks  shall  be  prepared  and  printed 
for  this  purpose,  and  suitable  interrogatories  shall  be  contained 
therein  to  enable  the  assessor  to  obtain  full  information  in  re- 
gard to  said  matters.  One  of  said  blanks  shall  be  furnished  eacl) 
tax-payer  in  the  county  by  the  assessor,  and  such  tax-payer  shall 
be  required  to  make  return  thereof  to  said  assessor  within  the 
time  required  by  law  for  the  return  of  assessment  lists,  and  said 
Hsts,  after  the  completion  of  the  assessment  books,  shall  be  filed 
in  the  office  of  the  county  clerk,  and  remain  therein  for  three 
years,  and  at  the  expiration  of  that  time  shall  be  destroyed  by 
the  county  clerk,  under  an  order  of  the  county  court. 

Sec.  2.  If  the  assessor  shall  be  of  the  opinion,  from  the  gen- 
eral understanding  in  the  neighborhood  of  such  tax-payer,  that 
such  list  is  not  a  fair  and  just  return  of  the  tax-payer's  property, 
it  shall  be  his  duty  to  add  to  the  value  of  said  property  so  re- 
turned by  said  tax-payer  such  amount  as  he  may  deem  proper, 
from  the  best  information  he  can  obtain,  and  to  deliver  a  copy 
of  the  list  as  made  by  said  assessor  to  such  tax-payer,  who  shall 
have  the  right  to  appear  before  the  county  Board  of  Equaliza- 
tion, or  the  city  Board  of  Equalization  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis, 
as  the  case  may  be,  at  the  next  annual  meeting  of  such  board, 
and  show  to  said  board  that  such  increase  is  unjust  and  unfair, 
and  in  that  event  the  board  shall  equalize  and  adjust  such  assess- 
ment according  to  the  evidence  that  may  be  submitted  to  it. 

Sec.  3.     Any  tax-payer  of  the  county  or  city,  as  the  case  may 


40  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

be,  may  file  with  the  assessor  at  any  time  prior  to  the  meeting 
of  the  Board  of  Equalization  for  such  year  an  objection  in  writ- 
ing to  the  assessment  of  the  money,  notes,  bonds,  evidences  of 
debt  and  corporate  stocks  of  any  other  tax-payer  of  such  county 
or  city,  and  the  assessor  shall  present  to  the  Board  of  Equaliza- 
tion such  written  objections  at  the  next  meeting  thereof  for  such 
action  as  said  board  may  deem  proper. 

Sec.  4.  In  all  counties  in  this  State  which  have  township  or- 
ganization the  duties  to  be  performed  under  this  act  by  county 
assessors  shall  devolve  upon  the  township  assessors,  who  shall 
have  the  same  power  and  proceed  in  like  manner  as  in  case  of 
county  assessors. 

Sec.  5.    All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  in  conflict  with  this  act  are 
hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  6.  It  being  important  that  separate  blanks  authorized 
by  this  act  shall  be  provided  for  use  of  the  assessors  in  making 
the  assessment  beginning  June  1,  1903,  an  emergency  has  arisen 
within  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  and  this  act  shall  be  in 
force  from  and  after  its  passage. 

AN  ACT 

To  require  assessing  officers  and  boards  to  enter  upon  the  assessor's  books 
and  records  of  such  boards  the  true  value  of  all  property  subject  to 
assessment,  and  to  extend  a  per  cent  thereof  as  the  taxable  value  in  a 
separate  column,  and  to  base  the  levy  of  all  taxes  upon  said  taxable 
value. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follozvs : 

Section  1.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  assessing  officers  and 
boards  in  assessing  and  equalizing  for  taxation,  any  and  all 
classes  of  property,  to  enter  in  a  column  in  the  assessor's  books, 
or  the  records  of  the  assessing  or  equalizing  boards,  as  the  case 
may  be,  the  true  value  of  such  property,  and  to  set  out  in  another 
column  forty  per  cent,  of  said  true  value  as  the  taxable  value 
thereof.  All  assessment  and  tax  books  shall  be  prepared  with 
columns  suitable  for  said  purpose.  This  shall  apply  to  the  as- 
sessment of  all  classes  of  property  for  taxation.  The  county, 
city  and  township  assessors,  county  and  city  boards  of  equali- 
zation, as  well  as  the  State  Board  of  Equalization,  and  all  other 
officers  charged  with  the  assessment  or  equalization  of  property 


Proposed  Tax  Lazvs.  41 

for  taxation  shall  be  governed  by  this  rule  in  making  such  assess- 
ments, and  in  the  equalization  thereof,  and  the  necessary  columns 
for  that  purpose  shall  be  provided  in  the  books,  records  and  cer- 
tificates used  by  said  officers  and  boards. 

Sec.  2.  The  taxes  upon  all  such  property  shall  be  extended 
upon  the  taxable  value  thereof. 

Sec.  3.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  in  conflict  with  this  act 
are  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  4.  This  act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from  and 
after  June  1,  1904. 

AN  ACT 

To  authorize   the   county  board  of  equalization  to   assess   and   equalize   the 
value  of  property  omitted  from  the  assessor's  book, 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  The  county  Board  of  Equalization  at  its  annual 
meeting  in  each  year,  in  addition  to  the  powers  now  conferred  by 
law,  shall  have  authority  to  assess  and  equalize  the  value  of  any 
property  that  may  have  been  omitted  from  the  assessor 's  books 
then  under  examination  by  said  board,  and  in  case  said  board 
shall  add  any  property,  real  or  personal,  to  said  assessor's 
books,  it  shall  cause  notice  in  writing  to  be  served  upon  the  own- 
er of  such  property,  stating  the  kind  and  class  of  property  and 
the  value  fixed  thereon  by  said  board,  and  naming  the  time  and 
place,  not  less  than  five  days  thereafter,  when  and  where  such 
owner  may  appear  before  said  board  and  show  cause  why  said 
assessment  should  not  be  made.  At  the  time  fixed  said  board 
shall  again  meet  and  give  an  opportunity  to  said  tax-payer  to 
be  heard  in  regard  to  said  assessment  and  may  change  or  alter 
the  same  upon-  it  being  shown  by  said  owner  that  said  assess- 
ment was  erroneous  or  improperly  made ;  otherwise,  said  prop- 
erty and  the  valuation  as  fixed  by  said  board,  shall  be  extended 
upon  the  assessor's  books,  as  in  case  of  other  property.  Said 
notice  shall  be  signed  by  the  clerk  of  the  county  court  and  shall 
be  served  by  the  sheriff  of  the  county,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty 
of  the  prosecuting  attorney,  when  called  upon  by  the  Board  of 
Equalization,  to  represent  said  county  in  any  such  proceedings. 
In  case  of  the  assessment  of  real  estate  belonging  to  non-resi- 
dents, publication  may  be  made  of  the  additional  assessment,  in 


42  Proposed  Tax  Lau-s. 

the  same  manner  as  publication  required  by  law  where  the  as- 
sessment has  b.een  increased  by  said  board. 

Sec.  2.  There  being  now  no  definite  provision  in  the  stat- 
utes for  the  assessment  by  the  county  Board  of  Equalization  of 
omitted  property,  an  emergency  is  hereby  declared  to  exist  with- 
in the  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  and  this  act  shall  take  effect 
and  be  in  force  from  and  after  its  approval. 

AN  ACT 

To  provide   for  the  assessment  and  taxation  of  property  omitted  from  the 
assessor's  book  and  overlooked  by  the  board  of  equalization. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  If  it  shall  appear  to  the  county  court  of  any 
county  in  this  State,  after  the  adjournment  of  the  county  Board 
of  Equalization  for  any  year  and  before  the  time  fixed  by  law  for 
the  return  of  the  delinquent  list  for  that  year,  or  to  the  president 
of  the  board  of  assessors  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  after  the  ad- 
journment of  the  city  Board  of  Equalization  and  before  the  re- 
turn of  the  delinquent  list  in  said  city,  that  any  property  has 
been  omitted  from  the  assessor's  book  fc-r  such  year,  it  shall  be 
the  duty  of  the  county  court  or  the  president  of  the  board  of 
assessors  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  as  the  case  may  be,  to  cause 
notice  in  writing  to  be  served  upon  the  owner  of  said  property, 
naming  a  time  and  place  when  and  where  said  property  will  be 
assessed  for  taxation  for  said  year,  and* thereupon  the  county 
court  or  the  president  of  the  board  of  assessors,  as  the  case  may 
be,  shall,  at  said  time  and  place,  proceed  to  assess  said  property 
and  extend  the  taxes  thereon,  and  cause  a  certified  copy  of  its 
action  to  be  delivered  to  the  county  collector,  who  shall  proceed 
to  collect  the  same  and  shall  account  therefor  in  the  same  ftian- 
ner  as  other  taxes  for  said  year. 

Sec.  2.  Whenever  any  property  shall  be  omitted  from  the 
tax  book  for  any  year  or  years,  the  county  court,  or  the  presi- 
dent of  the  board  of  assessors  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  as  the 
case  my  be,  shall  have  power  to  assess  the  same,  upon  the  same 
notice  and  in  the  manner  provided  in  the  preceding  section  and 
to  extend  the  taxes  thereon  at  the  same  rate  as  upon  other  prop- 
erty for  said  omitted  year  or  years,  and  such  taxes  shall  be  cer- 
tified to  the  collector  and  collected  and  accounted  for  as  other 


Proposed  Tax  Laws.  43 

taxes:  Provided,  however,  that  the  power  to  so  assess  omitted 
property  is  limited  to  the  three  tax  years  next  preceding  the  time 
of  making  such  order. 

AN  ACT 

To  amend  sections  9144,  9157  and  9167  of  article  II,  chapter  149  of  the 
Revised  Statutes  of  the  State  of  Missouri  of  1899,  concerning  the  assess- 
ment and  collection  of  revenue,  and  to  provide  for  the  assessment  of  real 
estate  once  in  four  years  in  all  counties  having  less  than  one  hundred 
thousand-  inhabitants  and  to  fix  the  compensation  of  the  officers  for 
making  such  assessment. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 
Section  1.  Section  9144  of  article  II,  chapter  149  of  the  Ke- 
vised  Statutes  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  1899,  concerning  the 
assessment  and  collection  of  revenue,  is  hereby  amended  hy  add- 
ing between  the  words  " contrary"  and  " second, "  in  the  nine- 
teenth line  of  said  section,  the  following  words:  "Provided, 
that  in  counties  having  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  inhab- 
tants,  ,rio  assessment  of  real  estate  shall  be  made  after  the  as- 
sessment beginning  on  the  first  day  of  June,  1904,  until  the  first 
day  of  June,  1908,  and  every  four  years  thereafter,  unless  the 
county  court  of  such  county  shall  for  cause  shown  require  said 
real  estate  to  be  assessed  annually;'7  so  that  said  section,  as 
amended,  shall  be  as  follows : 

"Section  9144.  Time  of  Making  Assessment.— "What  Lists 
Shall  Contain.— The  assessor  or  his  deputy  or  deputies  shall,  be- 
tween the  first  days  of  June  and  January^  and  after  being  fur- 
nished with  the  necessary  books  and  blanks  by  the  county  clerk 
at  the  expense  of  the  county,  proceed  to  take  a  list  of  the  taxable 
personal  property  in  his  county,  town  or  district,  and  assess  the 
value  thereof,  in  the  manner  following,  to-wit :  He  shall  call  at 
the  office,  place  of  doing  business  or  residence  of  each  person  re- 
quired by  this  chapter  to  list  property,  and  shall  require  such 
person  to  make  a  correct  statement  of  all  taxable  property  owned 
by  such  person,  or  under  the  care,  charge  or  management  of 
such  person,  except  merchandise,  which  may  be  required  to 
pay  a  license  tax,  being  in  any  county  in  this  State,  in  accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  this  chapter ;  and  the  person  listing  the 
property  shall  enter  a  true  and  correct  statement  of  such  prop- 
erty in  a  printed  or  written  blank  prepared  for  that  purpose ; 


44  Proposed  Ta.v  Laws. 

which  statement,  after  being  filled  out,  shall  be  signed  and  sworn 
to,  to  the  extent  required  by  this  chapter,  by  the  person  listing 
the  property  and  delivered  to  the  assessor.  Such  list  sliall  con- 
tain :  First,  a  list  of  all  the  real  estate  and  its  value,  to  be  listed 
and  assessed  on  the  first  day  of  June,  1893,  and  every  year  there- 
after, anything  in  this  or  any  other  section  to  the  contrary: 
Provided,  that  in  counties  having  less  than  one  hundred  thous- 
and inhabitants,  no  assessment  of  real  estate  shall  be  made  after 
the  assessment  beginning  on  the  first  day  of  June,  1904,  until 
the  first  day  of  June,  1908,  and  every  four  years  thereafter,  un- 
less the  county  court  of  such  county  shall  for  cause  shown  re- 
quire said  real  estate  to  be  assessed  annually;  second,  a  list  of 
all  the  live  stock,  showing  the  number  of  horses,  mares  and  geld- 
ings, and  their  value ;  the  number  of  asses  and  jennets  and  their 
value;  the  number  of  mules  and  their  value;  the  number  of  neat 
cattle  and  their  value ;  the  number  of  sheep  and  their  value ;  the 
number  of  hogs  and  their  value ;  and  all  other  live  stock  and  its 
value ;  third,  an  aggregate  statement  of  all  farm  machinery  and 
implements,  and  their  value;  fourth,  a  statement  of  household 
property,  including  the  number  of  pianos  and  other  musical  in- 
struments, clocks,  watches,  chains  and  appendages,  sewing  ma- 
chines, gold  and  silver  plate,  jewelry,  household  and  kitchen  fur- 
niture, and  the  value  thereof ;  fifth,  money  on  hand ;  sixth,  money 
deposited  in  any  bank  or  other  safe  place ;  seventh,  an  aggregate 
statement  of  solvent  notes,  unsecured  by  mortgage  or  deed  of 
trust;  eighth,  an  aggregate  statement  of  all  solvent  notes  se- 
cured by  mortgage  or  deed  of  trust ;  ninth,  an  aggregate  state- 
ment of  all  solvent  bonds,  whether  State,  county,  town,  city, 
township,  incorporated  or  unincorporated  companies ;  tenth,  all 
other  property  not  above  enumerated  (except  merchandise)  and 
its  value;  under  this  head  shall  be  included  all  pleasure  car- 
riages of  all  kinds ;  all  shares  of  stock  or  interest  held  in  steam- 
boats, keel  boats,  wharf  boats  and  all  other  vessels;  all  toll 
bridges,  all  printing  presses,  type  and  machinery  therewith  con- 
nected, and  all  portable  mills  of  every  description,  and  all  post 
coaches,  carriages,  wagons  and  other  vehicles  used  by  any  person 
in  the  transportation  of  mail  (except  railway  carriages),  all 
carriages,  hacks,  wagons,  buggies  and  other  vehicles  of  every 


Proposed  Ta.v  Laws.  45 

kind  and  description  kept  and  used  by  liverymen ;  all  carts,  hacks, 
omnibusses  and  other  vehicles  used  in  the  transportation  of  per- 
sons (except  railway  carriages),  and  all  paintings  and  statuary 
and  every  other  species  of  property  not  exempt  by  law  from  tax- 
ation. ' ' 

Sec.  2.  Section  9157  of  article  II,  chapter  149  of  the  Ke- 
vised  Statutes  of  1899,  concerning  the  assessment  and  collection 
of  revenue,  is  hereby  amended  by  striking  out  after  the  word 
1  *  June ' '  in  the  second  line  of  said  section,  the  words  and  figures 
"1881  and  every  two  years  thereafter, "  and  inserting  in  lieu 
thereof,  the  words  "in  each  year  in  which  there  shall  be  an  as- 
sessment of  real  estate ; ' '  so  that  said  section,  as  amended,  shall 
be  as  follows : 

"Section  9157.  Delivery  of  Books  to  Assessor,  and  Return 
to  County  Clerk.— The  clerk  of  the  county  court  shall  deliver  to 
the  assessor,  on  or  before  the  first  day  of  June,  in  each  year  in 
which  there  shall  be  an  assessment  of  real  estate,  the  assessor's 
book  of  the  last  assessment  of  real  estate,  and  the  list  of  taxable 
lands  furnished  by  the  register  of  lands  and  take  his  receipt 
therefor;  and  the  assessor,  as  soon  as  he  shall  have  completed 
his  assessment  and  made  his  assessor's  books  for  the  year,  shall 
return  the  whole  of  such  papers  and  documents  to  the  clerk. ' ' 

Sec.  3.  Section  9167,  article  II,  chapter  149  of  the  Kevised 
Statutes  of  1899,  concerning  the  assessment  and  collection  of 
revenue,  is  hereby  amended  by  adding  the  following  words  to 
said  section:  "Provided,  that  in  counties  of  less  than  one  hun- 
dred thousand  inhabitants  there  shall  be  no  assessment  of  real 
estate  after  the  assessment  beginning  June  1,  1904,  until  the 
first  day  of  June,  1908,  and  every  four  years  thereafter,  unless 
the  county  court  of  such  county  shall  for  cause  shown  by  an 
order  of  record  direct  an  annual  assessment  of  such  real  estate ; ' ' 
so  that  said  section,  when  amended,  shall  be  as  follows : 

' '  Section  9167.  Eeal  Estate— When  Assessed.— Eeal  estate 
shall  be  assessed  at  the  assessment  which  shall  commence  on 
the  first  day  of  June,  1893,  and  shall  be  required  to  be  assessed 
every  year  thereafter:  Provided,  that  in  counties  of  less  than 
one  hundred  thousand  inhabitants  there  shall  be  no  assessment 
of  real  estate  after  the  assessment  beginning  June  1, 1904,  until 


46  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

the  first  day  of  June,  1908,  and  every  four  years  thereafter,  un- 
less the  county  court  of  such  county  shall  for  cause  shown  by  an 
order  of  record  direct  an  annual  assessment  of  such  real  estate." 

Sec.  4.  In  such  county  in  any  year  in  which  there  is  no 
annual  assessment  of  real  estate,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
assessor  in  taking  the  list  for  the  assessment  of  personal  prop- 
erty, to  note  thereon  any  change  in  the  ownership  of  real  estate 
in  his  county,  and  also  any  changes  in  the  value  of  real  estate 
that  may  be  reported  to  him  or  that  may  come  to  his  knowledge. 
And  he  shall  report  all  such  changes  in  ownership  and  valuation 
to  the  county  Board  of  Equalization  at  the  next  annual  meeting 
thereof,  after  said  changes  have  been  so  noted  by  him.  And  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  such  board  to  examine  the  real  estate  book 
each  year,  and  cause  all  changes  in  ownership  to  be  properly 
noted  thereon,  and  to  raise  or  lower  the  valuation  of  each  tract 
of  land,  the  value  of  which  is  found  to  have  been  materially 
changed  since  the  last  assessment.  Whenever  the  board  shall 
raise  the  valuation  of  any  tract  of  real  estate,  as  hereinbefore 
provided,  notice  thereof  shall  be  given  and  the  same  proceed- 
ings shall  be  had  as  required  by  section  9132  of  the  Eevised 
Statutes  of  1899.  And  the  taxes  upon  real  estate  in  such  county 
shall  be  levied  upon  the  last  assessment  of  real  estate  in  said 
county  as  adjusted  and  equalized  by  the  county  Board  of  Equali- 
zation for  the  year  for  which  such  taxes  are  to  be  collected,  and 
the  county  clerk  in  making  out  the  tax  book  from  the  last  as- 
sessment of  real  estate,  shall  adjust  the  same  according  to  the 
changes  made  therein  by  the  Board  of  Equalization  for  such 
year.  The  assessor's  real  estate  book  shall  contain  suitable 
blank  spaces  and  columns  to  permit  changes  in  ownership  and 
valuation  to  be  readily  noted,  and  valuations  to  be  extended  for 
the  years  in  which  no  assessment  of  land  is  made. 

Sec.  5.  In  all  cases  where  there  shall  only  be  an  assessment 
of  real  estate  once  in  four  years,  under  the  provisions  of  this 
act,  the  assessor  shall,  either  in  person  or  by  his  deputy,  within 
the  year  next  preceding  the  return  of  his  assessment  book,  ex- 
amine each  farm,  separate  tract  of  land  or  town  lot  in  his  county 
and  shall  fix  the  value  thereof  from  such  personal  inspection,  and 
in  lieu  of  the  compensation  now  allowed  for  the  annual  assess- 


Proposed  Ta.v  Laws.  47 

ment,  shall  receive  for  the  assessment  of  real  estate  in  such 
fourth  year,  the  sum  of  ten  cents  per  tract  for  each  tract  or  town 
lot  assessed  by  him  and  for  the  noting  and  reporting  of  changes 
in  ownership  and  valuation  in  the  years  in  which  no  assessment 
of  real  estate  shall  be  made,  said  assessor  shall  receive  three 
cents  per  tract  for  each  tract  in  which  a  change  shall  be  made  by 
the  Board  of  Equalization. 

AN  ACT 

To  create  the  office  of  State  Tax  Commissioner,  and  define  the  duties  and 
powers    of   such   officer. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  There  is  hereby  created  the  office  of  State  Tax 
Commissioner,  which  shall  be  filled  by  appointment  of  the  Gov- 
ernor immediately  after  this  act  takes  effect,  and  the  person  so 
appointed  shall  hold  office  until  the  first  day  of  January,  1905. 
The  State  Tax  Commissioner  shall  be  elected  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  other  State  officers  at  the  next  general  election  in  Novem- 
ber, 1904,  and  every  four  years  thereafter,  and  shall  enter  upon 
the  discharge  of  his  duties  on  the  first  day  of  January  succeeding 
his  election.  Nominations  shall  be  made  for  such  office  and  the 
election  shall  be  'conducted  and  the  returns  thereof  shall  be 
made  as  in  case  of  other  executive  officers  of  the  State. 

Sec.  2.  The  State  Tax  Commissioner  shall  be  a  qualified 
voter,  not  less  than  thirty-five  years  of  age,  and  shall  have  re- 
sided in  tnis  State  the  five  years  next  preceding  his  appoint- 
ment or  election,  and  before  entering  upon  the  discharge  of  his 
duties  shall  be  commissioned  by  the  Governor  and  shall  take  and 
subscribe  the  oath  of  office  prescribed  by  the  Constitution  for 
other  State  officers,  and  shall  enter  into  bond  to  the  State  of  Mis- 
souri, with  sureties  approved  by  the  Governor,  in  the  sum  of 
five  thousand  dollars,  conditioned  for  the  faithful  performance 
of  the  .duties  of  his  office,  which  bond,  with  the  approval  en- 
dorsed thereon,  shall  be  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  State. 

Sec.  3.  Said  State  Tax  Commissioner  shall  have  and  exer- 
cise general  supervision  over  the  assessors,  county  and  city 
Boards  of  Equalization,  collectors  and  county  courts  in  the  mat- 
ter of  the  assessment  and  collection  of  revenue,  to  the  end  that 


48  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

all  the  properties  of  the  State  liable  for  assessment  for  taxation 
shall  be  placed  upon  the  assessment  rolls  and  to  secure  uniform- 
ity of  tax  valuation  and  tax  action  throughout  the  State.  He 
shall  provide  a  uniform  method  of  keeping  all  books  relating  to 
the  assessment  and  collection  of  taxes  in  each  county  of  the 
State ;  and  shall  also  prepare  the  necessary  blanks  to  be  used  by 
the  assessors  in  listing  property  for  taxation.  The  Tax  Com- 
missioner, or  his  chief  clerk,  shall,  at  least  once  in  each  year,  visit 
each  county  in  the  State  and  confer  with  the  assessing  officials 
of  such  county,  for  the  purpose  of  requiring  proper  assessment 
and  return  of  property,  the  uniform  value  thereof,  and  the  use 
of  forms  and  systems  of  keeping  accounts  prescribed  by  said 
Commissioner.  He  shall  instruct  the  assessors  in  regard  to 
their  duties  and  see  that  the  same  are  properly  performed.  He 
shall  appear  before  the  county  and  city  Board  of  Equalization  or 
board  of  assessors,  or  the  county  court  of  any  county  and  re- 
quire the  proper  and  uniform  assessment  and  valuation  of  prop- 
erty in  such  county,  and  also  shall  inform  such  boards  or  courts 
of  any  complaints  of  omitted  property  which  may  have  come 
to  his  knowledge.  He  shall  receive  complaints  of  the  improper 
administration  of  the  tax  laws  of  the  State  in  any  respect  that 
may  be  filed  with  him  by  any  citizen  and  shall  investigate  the 
same  and  take  steps  to  correct  any  irregularity,  omission  or  non- 
performance  of  duty  in  that  behalf.  He  shall  take  charge  of  and 
superintend  the  enforcement  of  the  collateral  inheritance  law 
and  the  collection  of  taxes  provided  for  therein. 

Sec.  4.  If  complaints  shall  be  made  to  the  State  Tax  Com- 
missioner after  the  county  Board  of  Equalization  has  completed 
the  examination  and  adjustment  of  the  assessor's  book  that  the 
assessment  of  property  in  any  county  has  not  been  properly  and 
fairly  made  as  required  by  the  laws  of  this  State,  or  that  prop- 
erty subject  to  taxation  has  been  omitted  from  the  assessor's 
book,  or  if  said  State  Tax  Commissioner  shall  believe  that  such 
facts  exist,  it  shall  be  his  duty  to  visit  said  county  and  investi- 
gate said  matter,  and  if  it  shall  seem  to  him  that  the  complaints 
are  well  founded,  he  shall  fix  a  time  and  place  in  said  county  for 
hearing  said  matter,  and  shall  notify  the  assessor  and  the  prop- 
erty owners  whose  property  is  alleged  to  have  been  omitted  from 


Proposed  Tax  Laws.  49 

said  list,  or  improperly  assessed  of  the  time  and  place  of  said 
hearing,  and  said  Commissioner  shall,  at  the  time  fixed,  fully 
investigate  the  assessment,  and  if  he  shall  find  that  any  property 
has  been  improperly  assessed,  or  any  such  property  has  been 
omitted  from  the  assessor's  book,  may  then  and  there  assess  said 
property  and  cause  the  same  to  be  added  by  the  clerk  of  the 
county  court  to  the  assessor's  book.  The  said  Commissioner, 
upon  hearing  of  said  matter,  shall  have  the  same  power  as  the 
circuit  court  of  the  county  to  compel  the  attendance  of  witnesses 
and  the  production  of  books  and  papers  relating  to  said  matter, 
and  he  shall  also  have  power  to  administer  oaths  to  all  such  wit- 
nesses and  persons  appearing  before  him.  And  in  any  case 
where  it  shall  appear  to  the  State  Tax  Commissioner  that  the 
entire  assessment  of  any  county  for  any  year  was  so  irregular 
and  defective  that  an  adequate  compliance  with  the  statutes  of 
the  State  cannot  be  had  without  a  re-assessment,  he  may  require 
such  re-assessment  to  be  made  of  all  the  property,  under  his  su- 
pervision and-  direction,  for  which  re-assessment  no  additional 
compensation  shall  be  allowed  to  the  assessing  officials  of  such 
county. 

Sec.  5.  If,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Commissioner,  any  county 
officer  has  wilfully  failed  and  neglected  to  perform  any  of  the 
duties  devolving  upon  him,  relating  to  the  assessment  and  col- 
lection of  taxes,  he  shall  notify  the  Attorney-General  and  the 
Attorney-General  shall  at  once  proceed  against  such  delinquent 
officer  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  and  the  Attorney-General 
shall  be  the  legal  adviser  of  said  Commissioner  and  shall  render 
said  Commissioner  all  necessary  legal  assistance  in  the  perform- 
ance of  the  duties  of  his  office. 

Sec.  6.  The  State  Tax  Commissioner  shall  make  diligent  in- 
vestigation and  inquiry  concerning  the  revenue  laws  and  sys- 
tems of  other  states  and  countries,  so  far  as  the  same  may  be 
known  by  public  reports  and  statistics  and  can  be  ascertained  by 
correspondence  with  officers  thereof,  and  with  the  aid  of  infor- 
mation thus  obtained,  together  with  the  experience  and  obser- 
vation of  our  own  laws  and  the  operation  thereof,  recommend  to 
the  Governor,  in  an  annual  report  to  be  made  on  the  first  day 
of  January  in  each  year,  such  amendments,  changes  and  modifi- 

D— 4 


50  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

cations  of  our  revenue  laws  as  seem  proper  and  requisite  to 
remedy  injustice  and  irregularities  in  taxation  and  to  facilitate 
the  assessment  and  collection  of  public  revenue ;  and  shall  state 
in  said  report  the  whole  amount  of  taxes  collected  in  the  State 
for  all  purposes,  classified  as  State,  county,  township  and  mu- 
nicipal, with  the  sources  thereof,  the  amount  lost;  the  cause  of 
the  loss;  the  proceedings  and  work  of  said  Tax  Commissioner, 
and  such  other  matter  and  information  concerning  public  revenue 
as  he  may  deem  of  public  interest.  And  the  Governor  shall 
submit  said  reports  to  the  General  Assembly  at  the  next  session 
thereof. 

Sec.  7.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  State  Tax  Commissioner 
to  lay  before  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  any  facts  that 
shall  come  to  his  knowledge  with  reference  to  the  value  of  prop- 
erty to  be  assessed  or  equalized  by  said  board,  and  by  order  of 
said  board  he  shall  visit  any  portion  of  the  State  for  the  pur- 
pose of  obtaining  any  information  desired  by  the  members  of  the 
State  Board  of  Equalization  in  reference  to  the  assessment  and 
taxation  of  the  property  in  the  State. 

Sec.  8.  The  State  Tax  Commissioner  shall  receive  a  sal- 
ary of  four  thousand  dollars  per  annum,  to  be  paid  out  of  the 
State  treasury,  in  the  same  manner  and  at  the  same  time  as 
the  salaries  of  other  state  officers. 

Sec.  9.  The  State  Tax  Commissioner  shall  have  power  to 
appoint  a  chief  clerk,  who  shall  have  all  the  qualifications  of 
the  Commissioner,  and  shall  perform  such  duties  as  may  be  as- 
signed to  him  by  said  Commissioner.  He  shall  have  all  the 
powers  of  the  Tax  Commissioner,  and  may,  under  the  direction 
of  the  Commissioner,  perform  any  of  the  acts  and  duties  devolv- 
ing herein  upon  the  State  Tax  Commissioner.  His  appointment, 
with  the  oath  of  office  endorsed  thereon,  shall  be  filed  with  the 
Secretary  of  State,  and  he  shall  hold  his  office  at  the  pleasure 
of  the  Commissioner,  and  shall  receive  a  salary  of  two  thousand 
dollars  per  annum,  to  be  paid  in  the  same  manner  as  the  salaries 
of  the*chief  clerks  of  the  other  State  officers. 

Sec.  10.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  in  conflict  with  this  act 
are  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  11.     It  being  important  that  there  should  be  provision 


Proposed  Tax  Lazvs.  51 

for  the  immediate  supervision  of  the  assessment  and  collection 
of  taxes  creates  an  emergency  within  the  meaning  of  the  Consti- 
tution, and  this  act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from  and 
after  its  approval. 

AN  ACT 

To  amend  section  9135  of  article  VI,  chapter  149  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of 
1899,  concerning  delinquent  and  back  taxes. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Sec.  1.  That  section  9315,  article  VI,  chapter  149  of  the 
Eevised  Statutes  of  1899,  concerning  delinquent  and  back  taxes, 
be  and  the  same  is  hereby  amended  by  inserting  after  the  word 
"month,"  in  the  last  line  of  said  section,  the  following  words: 
"'Provided,  that  where  suit  is  brought  for  taxes  delinquent  more 
than  one  year,  then  all  taxes,  whether  delinquent  or  not  at  the 
time  of  said  suit,  may  be  included  in  said  suit  and  judgment 
taken  for  the  same,  and  said  real  estate  sold  to  pay  the  same,  as 
provided  in  other  cases ; "  so  that  said  section,  when  amended, 
shall  read  as  follows : 

Sec.  9315.  When  Taxes  are  Hereafter  Delinquent.— Here- 
after as  often  as  any  delinquent  tax-list  or  tax-bills  shall  be  re- 
ceived by  the  county  court  or  other  proper  tribunal  or  officer 
from  collectors  at  their  annual  settlements,  the  same  shall  be 
made  by  the  county  clerk,  if  in  counties,  and  if  in  cities  contain- 
ing a  population  of  five  thousand  or  more  inhabitants,  by  the 
proper  officer,  into  a  "back-tax-book"  containing  the  same  facts 
and  in  the  same  form  as  provided  in  section  9300,  as  to  lands, 
city  and  town  lots  now  delinquent ;  except  that  in  counties  where 
an  alphabetical  arrangement  of  the  "land  list"  in  the  assessor's 
books  shall  have  been  required  by  an  order  of  the  county  court, 
such  "back-tax  book"  shall  be  made  out  in  alphabetical  order, 
in  the  name  of  the  owner,  if  known,  and  if  the  owner  be  not 
known,  then  in  the  name  of  the  person  to  whom  the  tract  or  lot 
was  last  assessed,  and  said  book  shall  be  delivered  to  the  proper 
collector;  the  collector  shall  proceed  to  collect  the  taxes  due 
thereon,  but  shall  not  bring  suit  thereon  for  one  year  after  such 
taxes  become  delinquent,  but  thereafter  he  shall  proceed  with 
such  delinquent  taxes  in  all  matters  the  same  as  provided  in  this 
chapter  in  reference  to  taxes  now  delinquent ;  all  taxes  hereafter 


52  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

becoming  delinquent  shall  bear  one  per  cent,  interest  per  month 
from  the  time  they  become  delinquent  until  paid,  and  shall  also  be 
subject  to  the  same  fees,  Commissions  and  charges  as  in  this  chap- 
ter provided  for  taxes  now  delinquent,  except  that  for  making 
the  same  into  the  "back-tax  book"  the  clerk  or  other  officer  who ' 
makes  such  book  shall  receive  only  ten  cents  per  tract,  city  or 
town  lot.  In  computing  interest  under  this  section,  a  fraction 
of  a  month  shall  be  counted  as  a  whole  month :  Provided,  that 
where  suit  is  brought  for  taxes  delinquent  more  than  one  year, 
then  all  taxes,  whether  delinquent  or  not  at  the  time  of  said  suit. 
may  be  included  in  said  suit  and  judgment  taken  for  the  same, 
and  said  real  estate  sold  to  pay  the  same  as  provided  in  other 
cases. 

AN  ACT 

To  repeal  sections  9300,  9301,  9302,  9303  and  9304  of  article  VI  of  chapter 
149  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  1899,  concerning  delinquent  and  back  taxes, 
and  enact  in  lieu  thereof  new  sections,  to  be  designated  as  sections,  9300, 
9301,  9302,  9303a,  93°3b,  9303C,  93»3d  and  9304. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows: 

Section  1.  Sections  9300,  9301,  9302,  9303  and  9304  of  ar- 
ticle VI  of  chapter  149  of  the  Eevised  Statutes  of  1899,  concern- 
ing delinquent  and  back  taxes  are  hereby  repealed,  and  the  fol- 
lowing sections  are  hereby  enacted,  to  be  known  as  sections  9300, 
9301,  9302,  9303a,  9303b,  9303c,  9,303d  and  9304: 

Section  9300.  Who  Shall  Make  Back  Tax-book.— Every 
two  years,  within  thirty  days  after  the  settlement  of  the  col- 
lector, the  several  county  clerks  in  each  county  in  this  State,  or 
in  such  cities,  the  register,  city  clerk  or  other  proper  officer,  shall 
make  in  a  book  to  be  called  the  "back-tax  book,"  a  correct  list 
in  numerical  order  of  all  tracts  of  land  and  town  lots  on  which 
back  taxes  shall  be  due  in  such  county  or  city,  setting  forth  op- 
posite each  tract  of  land  or  town  lot  the  name  of  the  owner,  if 
known,  and  if  the  owner  thereof  be  not  known,  then  to  whom  the 
same  was  last  assessed,  the  description  thereof,  the  year  or 
years  for  which  such  tract  of  land  or  town  lot  is  delinquent  or 
forfeited,  and  the  amount  of  the  original  tax  due  each  fund  on 
said  rgal  estate  (and  the  interest  due  on  the  whole  of  said  tax, 
at  the  time  of  making  said  back-tax  book,  together  with  the 
clerk's  fees  then  due)  in  appropriate  columns  arranged  therefor, 


Proposed  Tax  Laivs.  53 

and  tlio  aggregate  amount  of  taxes,  interest  and  clerk's  fees 
charged  against  each  tract  of  land  or  town  lot  for  all  the  years 
for  which  the  same  is  delinquent  or  forfeited;  said  back-tax  book, 
when  completed,  shall  be  delivered  by  said  clerk  or  other  proper 
officer  to  the  proper  collector  of  the  county  or  such  city, for  which 
he  shall  take  duplicate  receipts,  one  of  which  he  shall  file  in  his 
office  and  the  other  with  the  State  Auditor,  and  the  clerk  or  other 
proper  officer  shall  charge  such  collector  with  the  correct  amount 
of  taxes,  interest  and  clerk's  fees  contained  in  said  back-tax 
book.  In  all  such  cities  the  said  back-tax  book  shall  be  made  out 
in  alphabetical  order  in  the  name  of  the  owner,  if  known,  and 
if  the  owner  be  not  known,  then  in  the  name  of  the  person  to 
whom  such  tract  or  lot  was  last  assessed.  All  taxes,  interest 
and  clerk's  fees  hereafter  contained  in  the  back  tax-book  herein 
described,  shall  bear  interest  from  the  time  of  the  making  out 
of  said  back  tax-book  at  the  rate  of  ten  per  cent,  per  annum  until 
paid.  In  computing  interest  under  this  article  a  fraction  of  a 
month  shall  be  counted  as  a  whole  month :  Provided,  however, 
that  all  taxes  which  shall  have  become  barred  under  the  statute 
of  limitations  under  said  revenue  law,  shall  be  omitted  from  such 
back  tax-book. 

Section  9301.  Back  Taxes,  When  Collected,  How  a  Party 
May  Eedeem.— The  collectors  of  the  respective  counties  and  the 
collectors  of  such  cities  respectively  shall  proceed  to  collect  the 
taxes  contained  in  such  back  tax-book  as  herein  required,  and 
any  person  interested  in  or  the  owner  of  any  tract  of  land  or 
town  lot  contained  in  said  back. tax-book  may  at  any  time  before 
sale  for  taxes  redeem  such  tract  of  land  or  town  lot  or  any  part 
thereof  from  the  State's  or  such  city's  lien  thereon,  by  paying 
to  the  proper  collector  the  amount  of  the  original  taxes  as 
charged  against  said  tract  of  land  or  town  lot  described  in  said 
back  tax-book,  together  with  the  interest  on  the  same  and  the 
costs  accruing  under  this  article:  Provided,  that  if  suit  shall 
have  been  commenced  against  any  person  owing  taxes  on  any 
tract  of  land  or  town  lot  contained  in  said  back  tax-book,  for  the 
collection  of  taxes  due  on  the  same,  the  person  desiring,  to  re- 
deem such  tract  of  land  or  town  lot  shall,  in  addition  to  the  orig- 
inal tax  and  the  interest  and  costs  accruing  under  this  article. 


54  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

pay  all  necessary  costs  incurred  in  the  court  where  the  said  suit 
is  pending,  together  with  such  attorney's  fees  as  the  court  may 
allow. 

Section  9302.  Enforcement  of  Payment  of  Taxes  by  Suit, 
Etc.— If  on  the  completion  of  such  back  tax-book,  any  of  said 
lands  or  town  lots  contained  in  said  back  tax-book  shall  remain 
unredeemed,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  collector  to  proceed  to 
enforce  the  payment  of  the  taxes  charged  against  such  tract  or 
lot,  by  suit  in  the  courts  of  competent  jurisdiction  of  the  county 
where  the  real  estate  is  situated,  which  said  courts  shall  have 
jurisdiction  without  regard  to  the  amount  sued  on,  to  enforce 
the  lien  of  the  State  or  such  cities ;  and  for  the  purpose  of  pros- 
ecuting suits  for  taxes  under  this  article,  the  collector  shall  have 
power,  with  the  approval  of  the  county  court,  or  in  such  cities, 
the  mayor  thereof,  to  employ  such  attorneys  as  he  may  deem 
necessary,  who  shall  receive  as  fees  in  any  suit  such  sum  not  to 
exceed  ten  per  cent,  of  the  amount  of  taxes  actually  collected 
and  paid  into  the  treasury,  as  may  be  agreed  upon  in  writing,  and 
approved  by  the  county  court  or  in  such  cities  the  mayor  there- 
of before  such  services  are  rendered,  which  sum  shall  be  taxed 
as  costs  in  the  suit  and  collected  as  other  costs,  and  no  such  at- 
torney shall  receive  any  fee  or  compensation  for  such  services 
except  as  in  this  section  provided ;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
collector  when  suit  shall  have  been  commenced  against  any  tract 
of  land  or  town  lot  on  said  back  tax-book,  to  note  opposite  said 
tract  or  lot,  such  fact,  also,  against  whom  suit  has  been  com- 
menced :  Provided,  however,  that  in  case  of  suit  upon  any  such 
lot  or  tract  for  said  taxes  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  collector 
to  include  in  such  suit  all  taxes  against  said  real  estate  whether 
delinquent  or  not,  and  to  that  end  may  file  an  amended-  petition 
including  all  taxes  due  at  the  time  of  judgment  whether  delin- 
quent or  not,  but  a  failure  to  thus  include  all  taxes  shall  in  no  wise 
affect  the  validity  of  said  suit  or  the  lien  for  such  taxes  as  shall 
not  be  included  in  said  suit ;  and  provided  further,  that  in  cities 
of  thirty  thousand  or  more  inhabitants,  the  attorney  or  at- 
torneys appointed  by  the  collector,  with  the  approval  of  the 
mayor  of  such  cities,  for  the  purpose  of  prosecuting  suits  for 
taxes  under  this  article,  shall  be  entitled  to  a  fee  in  any  suit, 


Proposed  Tax  Laiv$.  55 

such  fee  not  to  exceed  five  per  cent,  after  judgment  is  obtained, 
collected  and  paid  into  the  treasury,  as  may  be  agreed  upon; 
and  if  such  taxes  are  paid  before  judgment  is  obtained,  the  at- 
torney collecting  the  same  shall  be  entitled  to  a  fee  not  exceed- 
ing two  per  cent,  on  all  sums  collected  and  paid  into  the  treasury. 

Section  9303a.  Actions,  How  Prosecuted— The  Petition— 
The  Tax  Bill.— All  actions  commenced  under  the  provisions  of 
this  chapter  shall  be  prosecuted  in  the  name  of  the  State  of 
Missouri,  at  the  relation  and  to  the  use  of  the  collector  against 
the  owner  of  the  property ;  and  all  lands  owned  by  the  same  per- 
son or  persons  may  be  included  in  one  petition  and  in  one  count 
thereof,  for  the  taxes  for  all"  such  years  as  taxes  may  be  due 
thereon,  and  said  petition  shall  show  the  different  years  for 
which  taxes  are  due,  as  well  as  the  several  kinds  of  taxes  or 
funds  to  which  they  are  due,  with  the  respective  amounts  due 
to  each  fund;  all  of  which  shall  be  set  forth  in  a  tax-bill  of  said 
back  taxes,  duly  authenticated  by  the  certificate  of  the  collector, 
and  filed  with  the  petition,  and  said  tax-bill  or  bills  shall  be 
prima  facie  evidence  that  the  amount  claimed  in  said  suit  is 
just  and  correct;  and  except  as  herein  otherwise  provided,  all 
notices  and  process  in  suits  under  this  chapter  shall  be  sued  out 
and  served  in  the  same  manner  as  in  civil  actions  in  the  circuit 
court ;  and  in  case  of  suits  against  non-resident  unknown  parties, 
or  other  owners  on  whom  service  cannot  be  had  by  ordinary 
summons,  the  proceedings  shall  be  the  same  as  now  provided  by 
law  in  civil  actions  affecting  real  and  personal  property,  save  as 
in  this  chapter  provided.  In  all 'suits  under  this  chapter,  the 
general  laws  of  the  State  as  to  practice  and  proceedings  in  civil 
actions  shall  apply  so  far  as  applicable  and  not  contrary  to  this 
chapter.  But  any^  failure  of  said  collector  to  include  in  such  pe- 
tition all  lands  owned  by  the  same  person  or  persons,  or  to  file 
with  such  petition  such  duly  authenticated  tax-bill  shall  in  no 
wise  affect  the  validity  of  such  proceedings  and  a  judgment  in 
such  suit  shall  be  as  valid  as  judgments  in  ordinary  actions  and 
subject  to  attack  the  same  as  judgments  in  ordinary  actions  and 
not  otherwise. 

Section  9303b.     Petition.— Said  petition  may  be  in  the  fol- 
lowing form  and  shall  be  valid  if  in  such  form : 


56  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

The  State  of  Missouri,  at  the  relation  and  to  the  use  of 

as  collector  of  the  revenue  of in  the 

State  of  Missouri,  plaintiff, 

vs. 
,  defendant. 

Plaintiff  states  that  relator is  the  legally  commis- 
sioned and  qualified  collector  of  the  revenue  within  and  for 
in  the  State  of  Missouri. 

That  the  following  described  real  estate  situate  in  said 

county,  to-wit :  

was  subject  to  taxation  for  years under  the 

laws  of  this  State  and  that  said  real  estate  was  duly  assessed 
for  taxation  for  said  years  and  that  under  and  by  virtue  of  the 
laws  of  this  State  there  were,  by  the  duly  commissioned,  qual- 
ified and  acting  officers  of  said  county  and  State  (and  city  in 
case  of  suit  for  city  taxes),  duly  assessed  and  levied  upon  said 
real  estate,  under  duly  established  rates  per  centum  on  duly 
assessed  and  equalized  valuation,  certified  and  extended  by  said 
officers  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  taxes  for  said  years,  in 

the  amounts  and  for  the  several  funds  as  follows : 

That  said  taxes  are  unpaid  on  said  real  estate  and  the  several 
tracts,  as  follows : 

Year.     Original  taxes.    Interest.     Co.  Clerk's  fees.    Total. 

a  n  u  it 

tt  tt  tt  tt 

And  that  said  taxes  became  delinquent  on  the  first  day  of  Jan- 
uary following  said  year  and  bear  interest  therefrom  at  the  rate 
of  one  per  cent,  per  month  together  with  collector's  commission 
and  county  clerk's  fees  as  provided  by  law. 

That is  the  duly  employed  attorney  under 

appointment  by  said  collector  duly  approved,  to  prosecute  this 
and  other  back  tax  suits  for  said  taxes  and  is  entitled  under  such 
contract  to  receive  as  fees  in  said  suits,  to  be  taxed  and  collected 
as  costs  therein  . . .  per  cent,  of  the  amount  collected  and  paid 
into  the  treasury. 

That  the  defendants 

are  the  record  owners  of  said  real  estate  at  the  time  of  filing  this 
petition. 


Proposed  Tax  Laws.  57 

Wherefore,  tlie  State  of  Missouri,  at  the  relation  and  to  tlie 

use  of ,  as  collector  of  the  revenue  within  and  for 

said in  State  of  Missouri,  prays  judgment  at  the 

relation  and  to  the  use  aforesaid,  in  the  sum  of dollars, 

aggregate  amount  of  said  taxes,  interest  and  clerk's  fees,  with 
interest  thereon  at  the  rate  of  ten  per  cent,  per  annum  from 
April  1,  -  — ,  together  with  fees,  commissions  and  costs  of 
this  proceeding  and  that  the  same  be  declared  a  lien  in  favor  of 
the  State  of  Missouri,  and  all  equities  of  redemption  foreclosed, 
and  that  said  lien  be  enforced,  and  said  real  estate,  or  so  much 
thereof  as  may  be  necessary  to  satisfy  such  judgment,  interest, 
fees,  commissions  and  costs  thereon,  be  sold,  and  that  a  special 
fieri  facias  be  issued  thereon. 


Attorneys  for*  Plaintiff. 

Section  9303c.  Summons.— It  shall  not  be  necessary  to 
serve  any  defendant  with  a  copy  of  the  petition  in  such  cause, 
but  the  writ  of  summons  shall  describe  therein  the  real  estate 
and  years  set  forth  in  the  petition  and  service  of  said  writ  of 
summons  shall  be  valid  and  binding  upon  such  defendants  thus 
served  without  a  copy  of  such  petition. 

Section  9303d.  Publication.— When  it  shall  appear  by  affi- 
davit of  collector  attached  to  such  petition  that  any  defendant 
is  a  non-resident  of  this  State,  or  it  shall  appear  by  the  return 
of  the  sheriff  that  service  can  not  be  had  upon  any  defendant, 
then  such  defendant  may  be  served  by  publication,  as  provided 
by  law  in  civil  actions  affecting  real  property :  Provided,  how- 
ever, that  such  order  of  publication  addressed  to  such  defend- 
ant, may  be  in  the  following  form : 

ORDER  OF  PUBLICATION. 

To ,  defendant. 

You  are  hereby  notified  that  a  suit  is  now  pending  in  the 

circuit  court  of county  in  the  State  of  Missouri,  to 

enforce  the  State's  lien  for  taxes  on  the  following  described  real 
estate  in  safd  county : 


58  Proposed  Tax  Laivs. 


for  (State  and  county  or  city)  purposes  for 

years  and  for  the  various  funds  set  forth  in  the  petition  on  file 
in  said  cause. 

And  that  said  suit  stands  for  trial  and  judgment  at  the  next 

term  of  court  to  be  begun  on  the  ....  day  of , 

A.  D.  19 . . . ,  when  and  where  you  can  appear  and  defend ;  other- 
wise judgment  will  be  rendered  according  to  the  prayer  of  the 
petition,  as  probided  by  law,  and  said  real  estate  be  sold  for  said 
taxes.  Dated  the day  of ,  A.  D.  19 ... 


Clerk  of  said  Court. 

Said  publication  shall  be  made  for  four  weeks  and  the  last  in- 
sertion shall  be  at  least  fifteen  days  before  the  first  day  of  the 
term  at  which  judgment  shall  be  rendered. 

In  case  of  unknown  parties  said  collector  shall  state  in  his 
petition  or  affidavit  that  he  cannot  insert  the  name  of  such  un- 
known parties  because  they  are  unknown  to  him  and  shall  set 
forth  as  far  as  he  is  able  in  said  affidavit  how  said  unknown  de- 
fendants are  interested  in  said  real  estate,  and  the  same  recital 
shall  be  set  forth  in  the  notice  or  order  of  publication  against 
said  unknown  parties.  The  affidavits  for  publication  may  be 
made  by  the  collector  or  his  deputy  or  his  attorney :  Provided, 
that  upon  the  filing  of  said  affidavit  for  publication  at  any  time 
during  the  pendency  of  said  suit,  said  order  of  publication  shall 
be  made  and  published  as  hereinbefore  required,  and  shall  be 
valid  and  binding  upon  the  parties  therein  named  as  effectually 
as  if  made  upon  the  filing  of  the  petition  in  said  cause.  And 
the  fact  that  the  writ  of  summons  shall  have  been  issued  to  the 
sheriff  and  returned  not  served,  and  that  no  order  of  court  was 
made  upon  such  return  for  publication,  shall  in  no  wise  affect 
the  validity  of  the  judgment  rendered  upon  such  publication. 

Section  9,304.  The  Judgment  and  the  Sheriff's  Duty.— The 
judgment,  if  against  the  defendant,  shall  describe  the  land  upon 
which  taxes  are  found  to  be  due ;  shall  state  the  amount  of  taxes 
and  interest  found  to  be  due  upon  each  tract  or  lot,  and  the 
year  or  years  for  which  the  same  are  due,  up  to  the  rendition 
thereof  and  shall  decree  that  the  lien  of  the  State  be  enforced, 


Proposed  Tax  Laws.  59 

and  tliat  the  real  estate  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  necessary 
to  satisfy  such  judgment,  interest  and  costs,  be  sold,  and  a  spe- 
cial fieri  facias  shall  be  issued  thereon,  which  shall  be  executed 
as  in  other  cases  of  judgment  and  execution,  and  such  judgment 
shall  be  a  first  lien  upon  said  land.  Such  special  fieri  facias 
may  be  in  the  following  form : 

SPECIAL  EXECUTION  FOR  DELINQUENT  TAXES. 

The  State  of  Missouri,  to  the  sheriff  of county,  greeting : 

Whereas,  the  State  of  Missouri,  at  the  relation  and  to  the 

use  of ,  collector  of  the  revenue  of 

,  in  the  State  of  Missouri  on  the 

day  of in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  A.  D.  19 . . . , 

at  our  circuit  court,  at  its  regular term,  A.  D.  19 . . . , 

in  said  county  of ,  recovered  judgment  and  decree 

against ,  defendants, 

in  the  sum  of dollars  and cents  for 

certain  delinquent taxes  and  interest, 

as  set  forth,  assessed  and  found  by  said  court  in  said  judgment 
and  decree  to  be  due  and  unpaid  upon  the  following  described 

real  estate,  to-wit :  

The  taxes  and  interest  found  due  upon  said  real  estate  and  the 
years  for  which  the  same  were  assessed,  are  upon  each  of  the 
above  described  tracts  as  follows,  to-wit :  . . . 

and  also,  certain  costs  which  have  been  taxed  at  the  sum  of 

dollars  and cents,  which  said  several 

sums  of  taxes,  interest  and  costs  were  declared  by  said  court  to 
be  a  lien  in  favor  of  the  State  of  Missouri  upon  the  above  de- 
scribed tracts  of  real  estate;  and, 

Whereas,  It  was  decreed  by  said  court  that  the  lien  of  the 
State  of  Missouri  upon  said  real  estate  for  said  taxes,  interest 
and  costs  be  enforced,  and  that  the  said  real  estate  or  so  much 
thereof  as  may  be  necessary  to  satisfy  such  judgment,  interest 
and  costs,  be  sold  according  to  law ;  these  are  therefore 

To  command  you  that  of  the  said  described  real  estate  you 
cause  to  be  made  the  debt,  interest  and  costs  aforesaid,  and  that 
you  have  the  same  before  the  judge  of  said  court  on  the 


60  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

day  of next,  to  satisfy  said  judgment  and  costs. 

And  have  you  then  and  there  this  writ  certifying  how  you  have 
executed  the  same. 

Witness  my  hand  and  the  seal  of  said  court,  etc. 

Said  sheriff  shall  advertise  said  property  under  said  writ 
by  advertising  as  in  cases  of  ordinary  executions,  but  in  making 
such  sales,  he  shall  expose  such  lands  for  sale  in  the  order  in 
which  they  are  described  in  said  writ.  And  whenever  enough 
shall  be  realized  in  making  such  sale  in  this  way  to  pay  all  taxes, 
interest  and  penalties  and  costs  on  the  real  estate  described  in 
said  writ,  no  more  real  estate  shall  be  sold;  such  sheriff  shall  not 
be  required  to  expose  for  sale  said  real  estate  in  different  subdi- 
visions than  those  contained  in  said  writ  or  such  portion  thereof 
as  may  remain  delinquent  for  taxes  described  in  said  writ,  but 
any  person  may,  before  sale,  pay  all  taxes",  interest  and  penr 
alties  on  any  tract  described  in  said  writ,  and  its  proportionate 
part  of  costs  of  suit  based  upon  the  assessed  valuation  of  the 
several  tracts  described  in  said  writ  and  stop  the  sale  on  such 
tract:  Provided,  however,  any  person  may  pay  up  the  taxes, 
interest,  penalties  and  costs  on  all  of  said  real  estate  or  any  por- 
tion thereof  and  prevent  a  sale  thereof. 

AN  ACT 

Requiring  the  payment  of  an  excise  or  license  fee  by  certain  corporations! 
created  by  the  laws  of  this  State,  and  certain  foreign  corporations  doing1 
business  in  this  State. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General' Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  Every  corporation  organized  under  the  laws  of 
this  State  and  every  foreign  corporation  doing  business  in  this 
State  other  than  insurance  and  express  companies  which  pay  a 
part  of  their  gross  receipts  to  the  state  and  except  corporations 
formed  for  religious,  educational  and  benevolent  purposes,  shall 
annually  pay  an  excise  or  license  fee  to  the  State  for  the  right  to 
exercise  its  corporate  powers  and  corporate  capacity  in  this 
State.  Corporations  created  under  the  laws  of  this  State  shall 
pay,  as  such  annual  license  fee  or  excise  for  such  right  or  privi- 
lege, twenty-five  cents  on  each  one  thousand  dollars  of  its  au- 
thorized capital  stock,  and  surplus,  and  foreign  corporations  do- 
ing business  in  this  State  shall  pay  the  same  amount  upon  the 


Proposed  Tax  Laws.  61 

proportion  of  its  capital  stock  represented  by  its  property  in 
this  State.  The  excise  or  license  fee  imposed  by  this  act  shall  be 
in  addition  to  any  tax  imposed  by  law  upon  the  value  of  the 
property  and  franchise  of  any  such  corporation  other  than  the 
mere  franchise  to  do  business  in  a  corporate  capacity. 

Sec.  2.  Each  corporation  required  to  obtain  a  license  under 
this  act  shall  make  application  therefor  to  the  Secretary  of  State 
on  ox  before  the  first  day  of  July  in  each  year,  and  shall  present 
to  him  a  verified  statement  of  the  amount  of  its  capital  stock 
and  surplus,  and  in  case  of  foreign  corporations,  a  verified  state- 
ment of  the  proportion  of  its  capital  stock  and  surplus  repre- 
sented by  its  property  in  this  State,  together  with  a  receipt  from 
the  State  Treasurer  for  the  amount  of  the  excise  or  license  fee 
required  to  be  paid  by  the  provisions  of  this  act,  and  thereupon, 
the  said  Secretary  of  State  shall  issue  to  such  corporation  a  li- 
cense for  the  ensuing  year,  and  he  shall  file  the  receipt  of  the 
State  Treasurer  with  the  State  Auditor,  who  shall  charge  the 
treasurer  with  the  amount  of  such  excise  or  license  fee. 

Sec.  3.  A  failure  on  the  part  of  any  corporation  to  comply 
with  the  terms  of  this  act  shall  forfeit  its  right  to  do  business 
in  this  State,  and  the  Secretary  of  State  shall,  within  ten  days 
after  the  first  day  of  July  of  each  year,  furnish  to  the  Attorney- 
General  a  list  of  all  corporations  doing  business  in  this  State 
which  have  failed  to  procure  a  license  as  required  by  this  act, 
and  the  Attorney-General  shall  thereupon  institute  proper  pro- 
ceedings to  oust  said  corporations  from  all  corporate  right  and 
privilege  in  this  State. 

AN  ACT 

To  provide  for  the  assessment  and  taxation  of  railway  cars  other  than  those 
which  are  the  property  of  railroad  companies. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  The  president  or  other  chief  officer  of  every  car 
company,  car  trust,  mercantile  company  or  corporation,  other 
than  a  railroad  company  operating  a  line  of  railroad,  and  every 
individual  owning  any  stock  cars,  furniture  cars,  fruit  cars, 
poultry  cars,  tank  cars,  sleeping  cars  or  any  other  kind  of  cars, 
si i all,  on  or  before  the  first  day  of  January  in  each  year,  make  to 
the  State  Auditor  a  true,  full,  and  accurate  statement,  verified 


62  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

by  the  affidavit  of  the  officer  or  person  making  the  same,  showing 
the  aggregate  number  of  miles  made  by  their  cars  over  the 
several  lines  of  railroad  in  this  State  during  the  year  next  pre- 
ceding the  first  day  of  June,  and  a  further  statement  showing 
the  average  number  of  miles  traveled  per  day  by  the  cars  of  the 
particular  class  or  classes  covered  by  the  statement,  in  the  or- 
dinary course  of  business  during  the  year. 

Sec.  2.  The  president  or  other  chief  officer  of  every  rail- 
road company  whose  lines  run  through  or  into  this  State  shall, 
on  or  before  the  first  day  of  January  in  each  year,  furnish  to 
the  State  Auditor  a  statement,  verified  by  the  affidavit  of  the 
officer  or  person  making  the  same,  showing  the  total  number 
of  miles  made  by  the  cars  of  every  such  car  company,  car  trust, 
mercantile  company  or  individual  over  their  lines  in  this  Statj 
during  the  year  next  preceding  the  first  day  of  June.  Such 
statement  shall  also  show  separately  the  name,  and  aggregate 
number  of  miles  traveled  over  their  lines  in  this  State  by  the 
cars  of  each  such  car  company,  car  trust,  mercantile  company 
or  individual,  and  the  average  number  of  miles  traveled  per  day 
by  each  of  the  particular  class  of  cars  covered  by  the  statement, 
in  the  ordinary  course  of  business  during  the  year. 

Sec.  3.  Such  statements  shall  be  filed  by  the  State  Auditor 
and  laid  before  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  at  the  time  and 
in  the  manner  as  is  required  concerning  the  returns  of  railroad 
companies. 

Sec.  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  State  Board  of  Equaliza- 
tion to  ascertain  from  said  statements  the  number  of  cars  re- 
quired to  make  the  total  mileage  of  the  cars  of  each  such  cur 
company,  car  trust,  mercantile  company  or  individual  within  the 
period  of  one  year.  The  board  shall  ascertain  and  fix  a  valua- 
tion upon  each  particular  class  of  such  cars,  and  the  number 
so  ascertained  to  be  required  to  make  the  total  mileage  of  the 
cars  of  each  such  car  company,  car  trust,  mercantile  company 
or  individual,  within  the  period  of  one  year  shall  be  assessed  to 
the  respective  car  companies,  car  trusts,  mercantile  companies 
and  individuals.  For  the  purpose  of  making  this  assessment, 
the  board  is  authorized  to  base  the  assessment  upon  the  returns 
of  the  several  railroad  companies,  in  case  any  such  car  company, 


Proposed  Tax  Laws.  63 

car  trust,  mercantile  company  or  individual  shall  fail  or  refuse 
to  make  the  statement  herein  required,  and  in  determining  the 
daily  average  travel  of  such  cars,  the  board,  in  so  far  as  may 
be  practicable,  shall  harmonize  the  statements  of  the  several 
railroad  companies,  car  companies,  mercantile  companies  and 
individuals  with  respect  thereto,  fixing  a  uniform  daily  average 
travel  of  cars  of  each  particular  class.  Such  assessment  shall 
be  included  in  the  record  and  proceedings  of  the  board,  and  shall 
be  filed  in  the  office  of  State  Auditor  on  its  adjournment. 

Sec.  5.  The  State  Board  of  Equalization  shall  apportion 
the  aggregate  value  of  the  whole  number  of  cars  of  each  class 
assessed  to  each  car  company,  car  trust,  mercantile  company,  or 
individual,  to  each,  county,  municipal  township,  incorporated  city 
and  town,  in  and  through  which  such  cars  have  been  run  and 
operated,  according  to  the  ratio  which  the  mileage  of  such  cars 
over  the  lines  of  railroad  in  such  counties,  municipal  townships, 
cities  and  incorporated  towns,  shall  bear  to  the  total  mileage  of 
such  cars  in  this  State. 

Sec.  6.  The  property  returned  to  the  State  Auditor,  as  re- 
quired by  section  1  of  this  act,  shall  be  subject  to  taxation  for 
State,  county,  municipal  and  other  purposes,  to  the  same  extent 
as  the  property  of  railroad  companies,  and  when  assessed  and 
apportioned,  as  provided  in  this  act,  shall  be  certified  and  the 
taxes  thereon  levied  at  the  same  time  and  in  the  same  manner 
provided  by  law  for  the  taxation  of  railroad  companies. 

Sec.  7.  The  county  courts  shall  levy  taxes  on  such  property 
for  State,  county,  municipal  and  other  purposes  in  the  same 
manner  as  provided  for  the  property  of  railroad  companies,  and 
cause  such  tax  levy  to  be  certified  to  the  State  Auditor.  On  or 
before  the  first  day  of  August  in  each  year  the  State  Auditor 
shall  make  out  and  transmit  by  mail  to  the  president  or  other 
chief  officer  of  every  such  car  company,  car  trust,  mercantile 
company  or  to  the  individual  owner,  a  certified  statement,  show- 
ing the  aggregate  mileage  of  the  cars  of  each  of  such  companies 
or  individual  owners,  over  the  several  lines  of  railroad  in  this 
State  during  the  period  of  one  year,  the  number  of  cars  required 
to  make  such  aggregate  mileage  in  one  year;  the  valuation  per 
car.  the  aggregate  valuation  of  such  cars  and  the  apportionment 


64  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

thereof  to  the  respective  counties,  municipal  townships,  cities 
and  incorporated  towns  and  villages,  and  the  amount  of  State, 
county,  city,  school  and  other  taxes  due  thereon.  On  or  before 
the  first  day  of  January  following,  every  such  car  company,  car 
trust,  mercantile  company  or  individual  shall  pay  in  same  man- 
ner as  railroad  companies,  the  amount  of  such  State,  conuty, 
municipal  and  other  taxes  set  out  in  said  certified  statement  of 
the  State  Auditor. 

Sec.  8.  If  any  such  car  company,  car  trust,  mercantile  com- 
pany, individual  or  railroad  company  shall  fail  or  refuse  to 
make  the  statement  herein  required,  such  car  company,  car  trust, 
mercantile  company,  individual  or  railroad  company  shall  for- 
feit and  pay  to  the  State  for  such  failure  or  refusal  the  sum  of 
not  less  than  twenty-five  dollars  %nor  more  than  one  hundred 
dollars  per  day,  for  the  use  of  the  common  school  fund,  for  every 
day  they  shall  fail  or  refuse  to  make  such  statement. 

Sec.  9.  When  ever  any  such  car  company,  car  trust,  mer- 
cantile company,  individual  or  railroad  company  shall  fail  or 
refuse  to  make  such  statement  or  to  pay  such  tax  for  the  period 
of  forty  days,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  State  Auditor  to  notify 
the  Attorney-General,  giving  him  a  full  statement  of  all  the  facts 
under  his  hand  and  seal,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  institute  a 
suit  or  suits  in  any  court  of  this  State  or  of  the  United  States 
having  jurisdiction,  in  the  name  of  the  State,  and  at  the  relation 
and  to  the  use  of  the  Attorney-General,  for  the  collection  of  such 
taxes,  penalty  or  penalties,  as  the  case  may  be.  The  property 
of  any  such  car  company,  car  trust,  mercantile  company,  indi- 
vidual or  railroad  company  shall  be  subject  to  seizure  under 
execution,  by  the  proper  officer  in  any  county  in  this  State,  to 
satisfy  a  judgment  rendered  for  such  taxes,  penalty  or  penalties. 

Sec.  10.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  in  conflict  herewith  are 
hereby  repealed. 

AN  ACT 

To  amend  article  VIII  of  chapter  149  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  Missouri, 
A.  D.  1899,  entitled  "The  assessment  and  collection  of  the  revenue,"  by 
adding  thereto  three  sections,  to  be  numbered  935ia,  935ib  and  935ic. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  L.  Article  VIII  of  chapter  149  of  the  Revised  Stat- 
utes of  Missouri,  1899,  is  hereby  amended  by  adding  thereto 


Proposed  Ta.v  Laws.  65 

three  sections,  numbered  9351a,  9351b  and  9351c,  and  which  sec- 
tions are  as  follows : 

Section  9351a.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  president  or 
other  chief  officer  of  every  railroad  company,  car  company,  car 
trust,  mercantile  company  or  corporation  and  of  every  indi- 
vidual owning,  controlling  or  operating  railroad  tracks  or  pri- 
vate tracks  or  switches,  to  make  to  the  State  Auditor  on  or  be- 
fore the  first  day  of  January  of  each  year  a  full  and  complete 
statement  verified  by  the  affidavit  of  the  officer  or  person  mak- 
ing the  same,  showing  by  their  appropriate  number  or  designa- 
tion the  several  cars  or  coaches  for  freight  or  passengers  be- 
longing to,  operated  or  controlled  by  a  company  not  incorpo- 
rated under  the  laws  of  this  State  or  not  operating  a  line  of  rail- 
road therein,  which  may  have  been  on  the  tracks  owned,  operated 
or  controlled  by  such  railroad  company,  car  company,  car  trust, 
mercantile  company  or  corporation  or  individual,  together  with 
the  cash  value  of  same,  which  may  have  been  on  such  track  or 
switch  during  the  previous  year  and  the  number  of  days  ex- 
ceeding three  each  such  car  or  coach  may  have  remained  on  such 
track  at  any  time  and  such  statements  shall  be  filed  with  the 
State  Board  of  Equalization  at  the  time  and  in  the  manner  as  is 
required  concerning  the  returns  of  railroad  companies. 

Section  9351b.  Each  such  car  or  coach  shall  be  taxed  each 
year  as  other  personal  property  and  shall  be  assessed  for  taxa- 
tion at  that  proportion  of  its  actual  cash  value  which  the  number 
of  days  that  it  shall  have  been  on  any  such  track  exceeding  three 
each  time  shall  bear  to  three  hundred  and  sixty-five,  and  such 
proportion  shall  be  deemed  the  value  of  such  car  or  coach  for  the 
purpose  of  taxation;  and  an  assessment  made  on  such  car  or 
coach  on  the  above  proportion  of  its  actual  cash  value,  based 
on  the  time  that  it  may  have  been  upon  any  one  track  at  one  time, 
shall  not  be  a  bar  to  an  assessment  based  on  the  time  it  may  have 
been  on  such  track  at  another  time  or  on  the  time  it  shall  be  on 
any  other  track.  The  cash  value  of  such  car  or  coach  may  be 
determined  in  any  manner  that  the  board  of  equalization  may 
prescribe,  subject  to  review  by  the  courts  in  any  appropriate 
proceeding. 

Section  9351c,    The  tax  assessed  on  any  such  car  shall  be  a. 

D— 5  ^-~ 


66  Proposed  Tax  Law's. 

lien  on  all  property  of  the  company  owning,  operating  or  con- 
trolling said  car,  which  may  be  enforced  in  any  mode  prescribed 
in  this  chapter,  for  the  enforcement  of  such  liens  or  the  collec- 
tion of  taxes. 

AN  ACT 

To  require  wholesale  dealers  in   distilled  spirits  to  obtain  license. 
Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  License,  To  Be  Taken  Out.— No  person,  com- 
pany, association  or  corporation  shall  be  permitted  to  sell  dis- 
tilled liquors  in  this  State,  including  whiskey,  brandy,  rum,  gin 
and  distilled  spirits  of  all  kinds  in  any  quantity  exceeding  ten 
gallons,  without  first  procuring  and  having  a  license  as  a  whole- 
sale dealer  in  distilled  spirits. 

Sec.  2.  Method  of  Obtaining  Such  License.— Any  person, 
company,  association  or  corporation  desiring  to  engage  in  selling 
at  wholesale  any  of  the  liquors  referred  to  in  section  1  of  this  act 
shall  obtain  a  license  to  engage  in  such  business  in  the  manner 
f o]lowing :  If  such  person,  company,  association  or  corporation 
desires  to  engage  in  business  in  any  county  of  this  State,  such 
person,  company,  association  or  corporation  shall  present  a  writ- 
ten application  to  the  clerk  of  the  county  court  of  the  county 
wherein  the  applicant  desires  to  engage  in  business,  and  if  such 
person,  company,  association  or  corporation  desires  to  engage 
in  business  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  the  application  shall  be  made 
to  the  license  collector  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis.  The  applicant 
shall  specifically  set  forth  in  said  application  the  place  where 
said  business  is  to  be  conducted  and  shall  state  by  whom  the 
building  is  owned  wherein  the  applicant  expects  to  engage  in 
business.  And  said  application  shall  be  sworn  to  by  the  person 
seeking  the  license,  or  when  the  applicant  is  a  company,  asso- 
ciation or  corporation,  the  application  shall  be  sworn  to  by  the 
principal  officer  thereof  or  its  managing  agent.  Such  applica- 
tion shall  also  contain  the  name  and  residence  of  all  persons  com- 
posing said  company,  association  or  corporation  or  having  any 
interest  therein. 

Sec.  3.  License,  How  Issued.— The  clerk  of  the  county 
court,  and  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis  the  license  collector  shall, 
when  application  is  made  to  him  as  provided  in  the  preceding 
section,  issue  a  license  authorizing  the  applicant  to  conduct  the 


Proposed  Ta.v  Laws.  67 

business  of  wholesale  dealer  in  distilled  spirits,  at  the  place 
specifically  mentioned  in  said  license  for  the  term  of  one  year 
from  the  date  thereof;  and  said  license  shall  be  attested  by  the 
signature  of  the  clerk  and  the  seal  of  the  county  court  attached 
thereto,  and  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis  by  the  signature  and  seal  of 
the  license  collector.  All  such  licenses  when  issued  shall  have 
endorsed  thereon  the  amount  of  the  license  fee  hereinafter  pro- 
vided and  shall  be  delivered  to  the  collector  of  revenue,  and  in 
the  City  of  St.  Louis  to  the  city  collector,  and  the  amount  due 
upon  such  licenses  shall  be  certified  to  the  State  Auditor  who 
shall  charge  the  proper  collector  therewith,  and  the  collector 
shall  deliver  the  license  to  the  applicant  upon  the  compliance 
by  the  applicant  with  the  other  requirements  prescribed  in  the 
next  succeeding  section,  and  upon  the  payment  of  the  license 
fee  provided  therein.  Said  license  shall  be  in  force  from  and 
after  its  delivery  to  the  licensee,  and  until  said  license  is  de- 
livered to  him  said  licensee  shall  not  be  authorized  to  conduct 
said  business. 

Sec.  4.  License  Fee.— Wholesale  dealers  in  distilled  spirits 
shall  pay  for  the  privilege  of  engaging  in  that  business  in  this 
State  the  sum  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  for  the  term  of 
one  year,  which  shall  be  paid  into  the  State  Revenue  fund  by 
the  collector,  and  in  addition  thereto  shall  pay 'the  same  ad  va- 
lorem tax  upon  the  highest  amount  of  all  goods,  wares  and  mer- 
chandise which  they  may  have  in  their  possession  or  under  their 
control  whether  owned  by  them  or  consigned  to  them  for  sale 
at  any  time  between  the  first  Monday  in  March  and  the  first 
Monday  in  June  of  each  year  as  is  or  may  be  required  to  be  paid 
by  merchants.  Such  wholesale  dealers  in  distilled  spirits  shall 
at  the  time  the  license  herein  provided  for  shall  be  delivered 
to  them,  execute  a  bond  for  the  payment  of  the  ad  valorem  tax 
upon  their  stock  in  the  same  form  and  with  securities  possessing 
the  same  qualifications  as  is  or  may  be  required  of  merchants, 
and  the  statement  of  the  amount  of  goods  on  hand  shall  be  made 
at  the  same  time  and  in  the  same  manner  and  the  value  thereof 
shall  be  assessed  and  adjusted  and  the  tax  thereon  extended  on 
the  same  book  and  collected  and  accounted  for  in  all  respects 
as  in  the  case  of  the  ad  valorem  tax  upon  merchandise, 


68  Proposed  Tax  Laivs. 

Sec.  5.  Penalty.— Any  person  who  shall  sell  any  of  the  dis- 
tilled liquors  referred  to  in  this  act  without  first  taking  out  and 
having  a  license  as  a  wholesale  dealer  as  required  by  this  act 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  shall  upon  con- 
viction thereof  be  punished  by  fine  not  less  than  $100  nor 
more  than  $500  for  each  and  every  sale.  And  any  corporation, 
association  or  company  that  shall  sell  any  of  the  distilled  liquors 
referred  to  in  this  act  without  first  taking  out  and  having  a  li- 
cense as  a  wholesale  dealer  shall  forfeit  and  pay  to  the  State  a 
like  amount,  to  be  recovered  in  an  action  in  the  name  of  the 
State  at  the  relation  of  the  proper  prosecuting  attorney. 

AN  ACT 

To  amend  section  3047  of  chapter  23  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  1899,  con- 
cerning  druggists   and   their' licenses. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  as  follows : 
Section  1.  Section  3047  of  chapter  23  of  the  Kevised  Stat- 
utes of  1899  is  hereby  amended  by  inserting  after  the  word 
"used"  and  before  the  word  "any,"  in  the  fourteenth  Hue  of 
said  section,  the  following  words:  "But  no  druggist  shall  sell 
intoxicating  liquors,  as  authorized  by  this  section,  without  first 
obtaining,  in  addition  to  the  license  now  required  by  law,  a  drug- 
gist's liquor  license.  Application  for  such  druggist's  liquor  li- 
cense shall  be  made  to  the  county  court  of  the  county  where 
the  drug  store  is  located  or  to  be  located,  and  in  the  City  of  St. 
Louis  to  the  license  collector,  and  shall  be  in  writing,  verified  by 
the  affidavit  of  the  applicant,  setting  out  specifically  the  place 
where  said  drug  store  is  to  be  kept,  the  value  of  the  stock  of 
drugs  therein,  and  the  name  of  the  owner  or  owners  and  the  per- 
son by  whom  said  drug  store  is  to  be  conducted.  If  it  shall  be 
shown  to  the  county  court,  or  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis  to  the  li- 
cense collector,  that  the  application  is  made  in  good  faith  for  the 
purpose  of  keeping  a  drug  store  and  not  for  the  purpose  of  sell- 
ing intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage,  said  court,  or  license  col- 
lector, shall  grant  to  the  applicant  a  license  for  a  term  of  one 
year,  and  the  clerk  of  said  court,  and  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis 
the  license  collector,  shall  issue  and  deliver  it  to  the  collector 
of  the  county  and  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis  to  the  collector  of  the 
city,  and  upon  payment  to  him  of  twenty-five  dollars  for  the  use 


Proposed  Tax  Laivs.  69 

of  the  State,  to  be  accounted  for  by  said  collector  and  paid  into 
the  State  treasury  as  other  licenses,  and  upon  which  said  col- 
lector shall  receive  the  same  commission  as  in  case  of  other 
licenses,  such  license  shall  be  delivered  by  such  collector  to  the 
applicant,  and  shall  authorize  him  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  as 
a  druggist  under  the  provisions  of  this  section,  and  not  other- 
wise, during  the  continuance  of  said  license.  No  such  license 
shall  be  assignable  and  it  shall  not  authorize  the  business  to  be 
carried  on  at  any  other  place  than  that  specified  in  the  applica- 
tion. If  the  county  court  of  any  county  shall  not  be  in  session 
when  such  application  is  made,  the  clerk  of  said  court  shall  issue 
a  license  until  the  first  day  of  the  next  regular  term,  upon  the 
payment  of  the  proper  proportion  of  the  annual  license  fee  for 
such  time;"  so  that  said  section,  when  amended,  shall  read  as 
follows : 

Sec.  3047.  May  Sell  or  Give  Away  in  What  Quantity, 
When.— No  druggist,  proprietor  of  a  drug  store  or  pharmacist 
shall,  directly  or  indirectly,  sell,  give  away  or  otherwise  dispose 
of  alcohol  or  intoxicating  liquors  of  any  kind  in  any  quantity  less 
than  four  gallons  for  any  purpose,  except  on  a  written  prescrip- 
tion, dated  and  signed,  first  had  and  obtained  from  some  reg- 
ularly registered  and  practicing  physician,  and  then  only  when 
such  physician  shall  state  in  such  prescription  the  name  of  the 
person  for  whom  the  same  is  prescribed,  and  that  such  intox- 
icating liquor  is  prescribed  as  a  necessary  remedy:  Provided, 
that  any  druggist  or  pharmacist  may  sell  or  give  away,  in  good 
faith,  any  wine  for  sacramental  purposes:  Provided  further, 
that  any  druggist  may  sell  alcohol  in  less  quantities  than  four 
gallons  for  art,  mechanical  and  scientific  purposes,  but  only  on 
a  written  application  signed  by  a  person  known  to  the  drug- 
gist to  be  a  mechanic,  scientist  or  artist,  in  which  application 
shall  be  stated  the  purpose  for  which  alcohol  is  to  be  used.  But 
no  druggist  shall  sell  intoxicating  liquors,  as  authorized  by  this 
section,  without  first  obtaining,  in  addition  to  the  license  now  re- 
quired by  law,  a  druggist's  liquor  license.  Application  for  such 
druggist  ?s  liquor  license  shall  be  made  to  the  county  court  of  the 
county  where  the  drug  store  is  located  or  to  be  located,  and  in  the 
City  of  St.  Louis  to  the  license  collector,  and  shall  be  in  writing, 


70  Proposed  Tax  Laws. 

verified  by  the  affidavit  of  the  applicant,  setting  out  specifically 
the  place  where  said  drug  store  is  to  be  kept,  the  value  of  the  stock 
of  drugs  therein,  and  the  name  of  the  owner  or  owners  and  the 
person  by  whom  said  drug  store  is  to  be  conducted.  If  it  shall 
be  shown  to  the  county  court,  or  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis  to  the 
license  collector,  that  the  application  is  made  in  good  faith  for 
the  purpose  of  keeping  a  drug  store  and  not  for  the  purpose  of 
selling  intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage,  said  court,  or  the  li- 
cense collector,  shall  grant  to  the  applicant  a  license  for  a  term 
of  one  year,  and  the  clerk  of  said  court,  and  in  the  City  of  St. 
Louis  the  license  collector,  shall  issue  and  deliver  it  to  the  col- 
lector of  the  county  and  in  theNCity  of  St.  Louis  to  the  collector  of 
the  city,  and  upon  payment  to  him  of  twenty-five  dollars  for  the 
use  of  the-  State,  to  be  accounted  for  by  said  collector  and  paid 
into  the  State  treasury  as  other  licenses,  and  upon  which  said 
collector  shall  receive  the  same  commission  as  in  case  of  other 
licenses,  such  license  shall  be  delivered  by  such  collector  to  the 
applicant,  and  shall  authorize  him  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  as 
a  druggist  under  the  provisions  of  this  section,  and  not  other- 
wise, during  the  continuance  of  said  license.  No  such  license 
shall  be  assignable  and  it  shall  not  authorize  the  business  to  be 
carried  on  at  any  other  place  than  that  specified  in  the  applica- 
tion. If  the  county  court  of  any  county  shall  not  be  in  session 
when  such  application  is  made,  the  clerk  of  said  court  shall  issue 
a  license  until  the  first  day  of  the  next  regular  term,  upon  the 
payment  of  the  proper  proportion  of  the  annual  license  fee  for 
such  time.  Any  druggist  who  shall  violate  any  of  the  provisions 
of  this  section  or  any  person  who  shall  make  a  false  statement' 
in  an  application  for  alcohol,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  mis- 
demeanor, and  on  conviction  shall,  for  the  first  offense,  be  fined 
not  less  than  one  hundred  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars^ 
and  for  a  second  offense  shall,  on  conviction,  in  addition  to  such 
fine,  have  his  certificate  of  registration  as  a  pharmacist  revoked. 


DIGEST 


OP 


Decisions  of  the  Appellate  Courts 


CONSTRUING  THE  REVENUE  LAWS  OF  THE  STATE. 


DIGEST. 


The  Commission  caused  to  be  prepared,  under  its  direction, 
by  Messrs.  J.  W.  Jamison  of  the  St.  Louis  Bar  and  C.  D.  Corum 
of  the  Boonville  Bar,  a  digest  of  all  the  decisions  of  the  appel- 
late courts,  construing  the  revenue  laws  of  the  State,  which  is 
as  follows : 

ASSESSMENT. 

1.  A  valid  assessment  is  a  prerequisite  to  the  lawful  exer- 
cise of  the  power  of  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  Wyatt  vs.  Wabash  Ry.  Co.,  114  Mo.,  I. 

Abbot  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.,  162. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Wenneker,  145  Mo.,  230. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Thompson,  149  Mo.,  441. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mission  Free  School,  162  Mo.,  332. 

2.  An  accurate  description  of  land  is  necessary  to  a  valid 

assessment. 

A  description  of  land  for  the  purposes  of  taxation  cannot 

be  supplied  by  parol  evidence. 

State  ex  rel.  Wyatt  vs.  Wabash  Ry.  Co.,  114  Mo.,  i. 

3.  The  ommission  of  the  assessor's  affidavit  from  the  as- 
sessment list  invalidates  the  assessment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Schooley,  84  Mo.,  447. 

4.  The  county  court  should  ascertain  the  average  rate  of 
taxation  for  school  and  building  purposes,  under  section  7732, 
E.  S.  1889,  from  the  returns  of  the  local  school  board  on  file  with 
the  county  court. 

Unless  the  rate  is  based  upon  such  returns  the  levy  will  be 
invalid. 

State  ex  rel.  Lane  vs.  Railway  Co.,  IIO  Mo.,  265. 

5.  Act  of  March  .11. 1897,  Session  Acts  1897,  p.  215,  applies 
to  street  railway  companies  whose  lines  of  road  are  partly  with- 


74  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

out  the  limits  of  an  incorporated  city  as  well  as  those  whose  lines 
of  road  are  entirely  within  a  city. 

Assessments  made  in  the  manner  required  by  said  act  are 
legal,  even  though  made  in  a  different  mode  than  that  prescribed 
for  the  assessment  of  steam  railroads. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Metropolitan  Street  Ry.  Co.,  161 
Mo.,  1 88. 

6.  An  assessment  foi  taxation  of  the  stocks  and  notes  of  a 
manufacturing  company,  as  ordinary  personal  property,  is  not 
void. 

It  is  only  an  irregularity  from  which  the  owner  may  appeal. 

If  the  company  does  not  appeal,  it  is  bound  by  the  assess- 
ment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tobacco  Co.,  140  Mo.,  218. 

7. .  Where  property  is  listed  for  assessment,  under  the  gen- 
eral description  "personal  property"  the  assessor  cannot  there- 
after, without  notice  and  without  discovering  any  specific  prop- 
erty omitted  from  the  list,  make  a  back  assessment  against  the 
personal  estate. 

An  assessment  on  "view"  of  the  assessor,  without  first  leav- 
ing with  the  absent  owner  or  his  family,  either  the  notice  or 
duplicate  list  of  assessment  respectively,  as  required  by  section 
7532,  R.  S.  1889,  is  void. 

Cape  Girardeau  vs.  Buehrmann,  148  Mo.,  198. 

8.  Where  defendant  company  resided  in  and  was  assessed 
by  Montgomery  county  for  taxes  in  November,  1893,  but  re- 
moved to  St.  Louis  in  December  of  that  year,  where  it  paid  a 
manufacturer's  license  for  1894,  it  was  nevertheless  properly 
taxed  in  Montgomery  county  for  the  last  named  year. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tobacco  Co.,  140  Mo.,  218. 

9.  A  clerical  error  in  the  date  of  the  assessor's  affidavit 
will  be  disregarded. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hurt,  113  Mo.,  90. 

10.  The  headings  of  the  columns  of  an  assessment  roll  con- 
stitute a  part  of  the  description  of  the  land  assessed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Vaile,  122  Mo.,  33. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  75 

11.  Irregularities  in  assessment  are  matters  of  defense  m 
a  tax  suit,  and  should  be  made  then. 

Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

12.  The  assessment  fixes  the  basis  of  taxation  for  two  years. 
There  is  no  provision  in  the  law  authorizing  an  increase  in 

land  values  by  reason  of  the  erection  thereon  of  any  building  or 
other  improvement,  within  the  time  between  biennial  assess- 
ments. 

State  ex  rel.  The  Center  Bldg.  Co.  vs.  St.  Joseph, 
1 08  Mo.,  304. 

13.  Several  lots  may  be  assessed  as  one  tract  where  they 
have  been  enclosed  and  previously  sold  and  conveyed  by-ono 
deed. 

Roth  vs.  Gabbcrt,  123  Mo.,  21. 

14.  A  tax  assessment  against  "unknown  owner "  is  not 
valid,  though  the  deed  records  furnish  the  names  of  the  patentee. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hurt,  113  Mo.,  90. 

15.  A  tax  assessment  is  not  rendered  invalid  by  the  Board 
meeting  in  the  court  room  instead  of  in  the  clerk's  office,  both 
rooms  being  in  the  same  building  and  no  one  being  misled. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Vaile,  122  Mo.,  33. 

16.  The  tax-payer  should  go  before  the  Board  of  appeals 
for  correction  of  errors  in  assessments. 

Where  he  fails,  the  courts  will  not  stay  the  execution  of  the 
tax. 

Deane  vs.  Tocld,  22  Mo.,  90. 

17.  Under  the  laws  of  1872,  the  assessor  could  only  make 
the  assessment  between  the  first  days  of  August  and  January. 

He  has  no  power  to  administer  the  tax-payer's  oath,  after 
said  date. 

State  vs.  Cannon,  79  Mo.,  343. 

18.  Eeal  estate  values  for  the  purposes  of  assessment  and 
taxation  are  fixed  by  the  assessor  and  not  by  the  tax-payer. 

The  time  of  valuation  is  not  when  the  lists  are  taken,  but 
after  the  tracts  listed  have  been  copied  into  the  book  known  as 
"The  Land  List." 


76  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Personal  property  should  be  assessed  according  to  its  cash 
price  when  listed. 

In  the  absence  of  a  wilful  assessment  of  land  at  more  than 
its  true  value,  the  tax-payer  cannot  recover  damages  for  an 
increase  in  its  value  by  the  assessor,  without  notice. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Reed  &  Sutton,  159  Mo.,  77. 

19.  Where  the  tax-payer  is  not  found  at  his  residence  or 
place  of  business, 'the  right  to  assess  for  taxation  attaches  upon 
the  leaving  of  the  required  notice  at  either  place,  the  tax-payer 
failing  to  respond  thereto. 

An  assessment  in  such  case,  of  a  lump  sum,  instead  of  list-- 
ing the  items  of  property,  is  a  mere  irregularity. 

The  assessment  is  not  void. 

The  tax-payer  failing  to  appeal  from  such  assessment,  can 
not  be  heard  to  complain  of  such  irregularity  in  a  suit  for  tho. 
collection  of  the  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cummings,  151  Mo.,  49. 

20.  "Where  the  owner  of  the  property  is  known,  its  assess- 
ment will  be  void  when  not  made  in  his  name. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Wenneker,  145  Mo.,  230. 

21.  The  assessment  for  taxation  of  a  tract  of  land  in  the 
name  of  "the  estate  of  Jacob  H.  Burrough"  is  an  irregularity. 

Such  assessment,  however,  is  not  void  as  not  being  made  in 
the  name  of  the.  real  owner. 

City  of  Cape  Girardeau  vs.  Burrotigh,  112  Mo.,  559. 

22.  Where  a  tax-payer  neglects  or  refuses  to  furnish  tho 
assessor  with  a  list  of  his  property,  and  the  assessor  makes  tho 
assessment,  his  action  is  judicial  and  conclusive,  except  on  ap- 
peal to  the  Board  of  Equalization. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hoyt,  123  Mo.,  348. 

23.  Where  the  assessor  leaves  the  lists  and  notice  required 
in  the  absence  or  sickness  of  the  owner,  it  will  be  presumed  that 
he  left  the.m  at  the  proper  place  and  within  the  time  prescribed 
by  the  statute. 

The  notice  required  by  section  7532,  E.  S.  1889,  to  the  ab- 
sent tax-payer  to  furnish  a  sworn  statement  of  his  property, 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  77 

under  penalty,  lias  no  application  to  section  7567,  which  au- 
thorizes the  assessor,  in  the  absence  or  sickness  of  the  head  of  the 
family  to  make  out  a  list  of  the  property  on  his  own  view  and  to 
leave  a  duplicate  thereof  with  some  member  of  his  family  over 
fifteen  years  of  age,  or  with  the  owner  himself,  if  made  out  in 
his  presence. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Seaborn,  139  Mo.,  582. 

24.  Assessors   have   no   jurisdiction   to    assess    property 

otherwise  than  is  prescribed  by  statute. 

i 
Abbott  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.,  166. 

25.  Land  must  be  assessed  in  the  name  of  the  owner,  and 
when  taxes  are  not  paid,  judgment  must  be  rendered  in  the 
name  of  the  owner  of  the  land. 

Abott  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.  162. 
Hume  vs.  Wainscott,  46  Mo.,  145. 

26.  The  action  of  the  assessor,  that  of  the  Board  of  Ap- 
peals and  of  the  county  court  in  assessing  property,  is  judicial 
in  its  character. 

Insurance  Co.  vs.  Charles,  47  Mo.,  466. 
Lee  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  47  Mo.,  594. 

27.  The  intent  of-  the  Legislature  has  been  to  require  the 
payment  of  taxes  each  year  and  to  require  assessors  and  col- 
lectors to  assess  and  collect  taxes  which  have  been  omitted  in 
previous  years  by  accident  or  mistake. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  County  Clerk,  57  Mo.,  223. 

28.  Our  statute  providing  the    duties    of   the   Board    of 
Equalization  when  notified  by  the  assessor  that  a  person  has 
falsely  listed  his  property  for  taxation,  and  with  intent  to  de- 
fraud, is  not  unconstitutional,  in  that  it  deprives  the  accused  of 
the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  or  of  his  property  without  due  process 

of  law. 

i 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Moss,  69  Mo.,  495. 

29.  A  vendee  of  real  estate  in  possession  under  a  contract 
of  sale,  is  liable  for  all  taxes  assessed  after  the  commencement 
of  his  possession. 

Farber  vs.  Purdy,  69  Mo.,  60 1. 


78  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

30.  Where  the  ordinance  of  the  town  provides  that  assess- 
ment of  property  shall  not  be  made  until  after  the  first  day  of 
"May  in  each  and  every  year,  an  assessment  made  r>rior  to  that 
date  is  void. 

Town  of  Warrensburg  vs.  Miller,  77  Mo.,  56. 

31.  Where  the  assessor  demands  the  owner  of  property  to 
furnish  a  list  thereof,  and  the  owner  neglects  or  refuses  to 
furnish  such  list,  the  assessor  may  ascertain  the  taxable  prop- 
erty owned  by  such  party  and  place  it  in  his  book  for  taxa- 
tion. 

Meyer  vs.  Rosenblatt,  78  Mo.,  495. 

32.  The  provision  of  the  statute  in  reference  to  the  duties 
of  assessor  in  assessing  property,  do  not  prevent  the  assessor 
from  afterwards  assessing  property  where  the  owner  and  the 
assessor  were  unable  at  the  time  of  making  the  list  to  estimate 
the  value  of  the  property,  and  where  it  was  agreed  that  the  as- 
sessor might  afterwards  ascertain  the  value  of  the  property  and 
make  the  assessment. 

Nor  was  it  necessary  that  the  owner  received  notice  of  the 
valuation  fixed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stamm,  165  Mo.,  73. 

33.  Mere  informalities  in  making  the  assessment  or  in  mak- 
ing the  tax  list,  or  that  the  assessment  was  not  made  or  com- 
pleted in  the  time  required  by  law,  do  not  affect  the  validity 
of  the  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stamm,  165  Mo.,  73. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phillips,  137  Mo.,  259.^ 

34.  Nor  does  the  number  of  books  in  which  assessments 
are  made  affect  the  legality  of  the  assessment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stamm,  165  Mo.,  73. 

35.  For  the  purpose  of  taxation,  the  law  contemplates  that 
property  shall  be  assessed  at  its  true  value  in  money. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co.,  165 
Mo.,  516. 

36.  Section  9277    does  not  require  that  the  order  of  the 
county  court  made  thereafter  shall  specify  the  taxes  that  are 
included  in  the  order. 


Digcsl  of  flic  J\ci'C)!ue  Latvs.  79 

It  need  only  show  that  the  court  is  satisfied  that  there 
is  a  necessity  for  the  assessment  and  levy  of  other  taxes. 

Nor  is  it  required  that  the  prosecuting  attorney  shall  state 
in  his  petition  the  facts  and  reasons  why  such  taxes  shall  be 
levied. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  165  Mo.,  607. 

37.  Where  the  assessment  list  furnished  by  the  assessor  is 
made  out  and  signed  by  the  president  of  a  bank,  and  the  presi- 
dent of  the  bank  did  not  specify  the  property  owned  by  classes, 
but  instead  made  a  lumping  valuation,  the  bank  cannot  complain 
because  the  list  did  not  specify. 

City  of  Lexington  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank,  165  Mo.,  671.. 

38.  After  an  assessment  of  personal  property  has  been 
made,  the  assessor  is  without  authority  to  increase  the  original 
assessment  without  notice  to  the  tax-payer. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stamm,  165  Mo.,  73. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Spencer,  114  Mo.,  574. 

39.  In  determining  the  value  of  the  tangible  property  of  a 
telegraph  company  located  in  any  state,  it  is  proper  to  com- 
pare the  length  of  its  line  in  that  state  with  the  length  of  the 
entire  line,  or  to  take  the  aggregate  value  of  the  shares  of  its 
capital  stock  and  deduct  therefrom  such  portion  of  that  valua- 
tion as  is  proportional  to  the  length  of  lines  without  the  state, 
and  also  to  deduct  therefrom  the  value  of  its  real  estate  and 
machinery  subject  to  local  taxation. 

Taxes  so  assessed  constitute  an  excise  tax  upon  the  prop- 
erty or  capital  of  the  corporation  and  not  a  tax  upon  any  fran- 
chise. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Western  Union  Telegraph  Com- 
pany, 165  Mo.,  516. 

40.  Dogs  are  assessed  as  personal  property,  and  the  as- 
sessor is  allowed  no  increase  in  his  emoluments  for  assessing 

them. 

Williams  vs.  Chariton  County,  85  Mo.,  645. 

41.  The  assessor  has  no  authority  to  make  out  a  list  of  the 
lax-payer's"  property,  unless  the  tax-payer  has  failed  to  make 
out  and  deliver  it. 

R.  S.,  1899,  7532  and  7535. 

State  ex  rel.  sv.  Spencer,  114  Mo.,  574. 


80  Digest  of  the  Rci-cnuc  I/itws. 

42.  If  the  tax-payer  makes  out  and  delivers  a  list  of  his 
personal  property  to  the  assessor,  and  the  assessor  receives  the 
same  without  objection,  the  latter  cannot  raise  the  valuation  of 
the  property  without  notice  to  the  tax-payer. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Spencer,  114  Mo.,  574. 

43.  A  personal  tax  cannot  be  assessed  against  a  non-resi- 
dent; nor  can  the  property  of  a  non-resident  be  taxed  unless  it 
has  an  actual  situs  in  this  State. 

Corn  vs.  City  of  Cameron,  19  App.,  573. 

44.  Notice  to  the  tax-payer  is  required  when  the  valua- 
tion of  real  estate  is  raised.    Notice  is  not  provided  for  as  to 
personalty. 

Mining  Company  vs.  Neptune,  19  App.,  439. 

45.  A  person  owning  property  on  the  first  day  of  June  is 
liable  for  the  taxes  for  the  next  ensuing  year. 

State  ex  rel  vs.  Snyder,  139  Mo.,  .549. 

46.  Seal  estate  must  be  assessed  in  the  name  of  the  owner. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Thompson,  149  Mo.,  441. 

47.  The  assessment  of  taxes  on  an  incorporated  bank  must 
be  against  the  owners  of  the  stock. 

An  assessment  of  the  property  of  a  private  bank  may  be 
made  in  the  business  name  adopted  by  the  co-partnership. 
This  mode  was  not  changed  by  the  Act  of  April  1,  1891. 
City  of  Stanberry  vs.  Jordan,  145  Mo.,  371. 

48.  The  assessment  of  property  of  a  railroad   should  be 
in  the  name  of  the  share  holders,  not  in  the  name  of  the  cor- 
poration. 

Railroad  vs.  Maguire,  49  Mo.,  483. 

49.  If  a  tax-payer  neglects  or  refuses  to  furnish  the  asses- 
sor with  a  list  of  his  property,  and  the  assessor  makes  the  as- 
sessment, his  action  is  judicial  and  conclusive  unless  appealed 
from. 

State  ex  rel.  Hoyt,  123  Mo.,  348. 

50.  Under  the  Act  of  February  20th,  1865,  assessments 
upon  salaries  and  incomes  should  be  based  upon  the  amount 


Digest  of  the  Rci'cnuc  Laws.  81 

thereof  received  by  the  person  as^sed  for  the  year  next  pre- 
ceding the  time  of  assessment. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

51.  After  the  passage  of  the  Act  of  1871,  pertaining  to 
railroad  taxation,  (Acts  of  1871,  page  56),  the  City  of  Jefferson 
had  no  authority  to  assess  the  property  of  railroad  companies 
situate  within  its  limits. 

Railroad  vs.  Watson,  61  Mo.,  57. 

52.  The  Act  of  May  20th,  1889,  providing  for  the  assess- 
ment of  city  property  in  cities  of  the  third  class,  by  the  city  and 
county  assessors  jointly,  was  not  affected  by  section  1545,  E. 
S.  1889,  until  November  first,  1889. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Edwards,  136  Mo.,  360. 

53.  The  County  Boards  of  Equalization,  in  hearing  com- 
plaints and  equalizing  assessments,  act  judicially. 

They  have  power  to  equalize  assessments  on  real  property 
bi annually  and  not  annually. 

Lead  Company  vs.  Simms,  108  Mo.,  222. 

54.  Annual  assessments  of  real  estate  in  the  city  of  St. 
Louis  are  proper,  by  virtue  of  the  charter  of  the  city  and  the 
Legislature  of  the  State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Powers,  68  Mo.,  320. 

55.  An  assessment  under  the  law  of  1855,  in  the  name  of  the 
original  patentee,  who  was  not  the  record  or  apparent  owner  of 
the  land,  was  void. 

Hubbard  vs.  Gilpin,  57  Mo.,  441. 

58.    The  vendee  of  real  estate,  who  is  in  possession,  under 
contract  of  sale  at  the  date  of  the  time  of  the  assessment,  is  the 

owner  for  the  purpose  of  taxation. 

'  f 

Anderson  vs.  Harwood,  47  App.,  660. 

57.    The  meaning  of  W.  S.,  section  1167,  is  that  all  subdivi- 
sions of  a  section  of  land  belonging  to  the  same  person  should 
be  assessed  as  one  tract,  whether  contiguous  or  not. 
Sparks  vs.  Clark,  57  Mo.,  58. 

D—  6 


82  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

58  The  county  clerk  Ms  no  authority  to  assess  property 
for  school  or  other  taxes. 

His  powers  are  limited  to  the  computation  and  apportion- 
ment of  the  revenues  upon  the  returns  made  by  the  assessor. 
School  District  vs.  Wickersham,  34  App.,  337. 

59.  Taxes  on  real  property  are  assessed  against  the  land 
and  not  against  the  owner. 

Matthews  vs.  Kansas  City,  80  Mo.,  231. 

60.  Under  the  Act  of  1864,  taxes  must  have  been  assessed 
against  the  owner  of  the  property. 

Gaines  vs.  Fender,  82  Mo.,  497. 

BACK  ASSESSMENTS. 

1.  Back  assesments,  for  omitted  years,  may  be  made  and 
enforced  against  lands  in  the  hands  of  a  subsequent  purchaser. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  H.  &  St.  J.  Ry.  Co.,  81  Mo.,  285. 

2.  Back  assessments  should  show  on  their  face  the  specific 
property  omitted. 

Cape  Girardeau  vs.  Bnehrman,  148  Mo.,  198. 

3.  Section  three,  of  the  Act  of  March  10th,  1871,  provides 
only  for  the  assessment  and  collection  of  taxes  upon  property 
theretofore  subject  to  taxation,  which  through  inadvertance  had 
escaped. 

This  act  did  not  operate  retrospectively  within  the  mean- 
ing of  the  Constitution. 

Livingston  Co.  vs.  Railroad,  60  Mo.,  51$. 

4.  The  Eevenue  Act  of  1865,  page  75,  provided  that  the 
county  clerk  should  make  out  a  supplemental  tax-book  for  the 
collection  of  omitted  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  County  Court,  41  Mo.,  503. 

5.  A  purchaser  of  real  estate  is  presumed  to  know  that  it 
may  be  thereafter  assessed  and  charged  with  taxes  which  have 
been  omitted. 

The  State  is  not  chargeable  with  the  negligence  of  its  offi- 
cers in  omitting  land  from  the  assessment  books. 
State  ex  rel.  Fullerton,  143  Mo.,  682. 


Digest  of  the  R event ic  Laws.  83 


ABBREVIATIONS. 

1.  Only  such  abbreviations  can  be  used  in  tax  deeds  and 
proceedings  as  are  authorized  by  statute. 

2.  Such  abbreviations  are  insufficient  where  they  fail  to 
identify  the  land. 

Lowe  vs.  Ekey,  82  Mo.,  286. 

3.  The  abbreviations  "ex"  for  except,  and  "a"  for  acre, 
and  "cor"  for  corner,  in  the  assessment  rolls,  being  in  every- 
day use  and  well  understood,  are  sufficient. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Vaile,  122  Mo.,  33. 


BANKS. 

1.  Under  the  provisions  of  the  forty-first  section  of  the 
Act  of  Congress  of  June  3,  1864,  taxes  imposed  by  the  State 
upon  stock   in  national    banks   must   be   specifically   assessed 
against  the  shareholders. 

Lionberger  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  6/.\ 
Bank  vs.  Meredith,  44  Mo.,  500. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Dowling,  50  Mo.,  134. 
Springfield  vs.  Bank,  87  Mo.,  441. 

2.  For  the  purposes  of  assessment  and  taxation,  the  stat- 
ute makes  no  distinction  between  stock  in  national  banks  and 
banks  organized  under  the  laws  of  this  State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Catron,  118  Mo.,  280. 

3.  The  State  can  only  impose  such  taxes  upon  a  national 
banking  corporation  as  are  authorized  by  the  act  of  Congress 
creating  them. 

City  of  Carthage  vs.  Bank,  71  Mo.,  508. 

4.  The  shares  of  stock  in  national  banks  are  liable  to  as- 
sessment and  taxation  in  this  State. 

Lionberger  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  67. 
National  Bank  vs.  Meredith,  44  Mo.,  500. 
Curtis  vs.  Ward,  58  Mo.,  295. 


84  Digest-  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

5.  It  is  sufficient  that  tax  assessments  are  made  against  a 
private  bank  in  the  name  under  which  it  does  business. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank  of  Neosho,  120  Mo.,  161. 
City  of  Stanberry  vs.  Jordan,  145  Mo.,  371. 

6.  Under  the  Act  of  1891,  (Laws  of  1891,  p.  195),  bank 
assessments  must  be  made  against  the  owners  of  the  stock  and 
not  against  the  corporation. 

City  of  Stanberry  vs.  Jordan,  145  Mo.,  371. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank,  160  Mo.,  640. 


.  .  .  ...          - 

7.  The  Act  of  1895,  -page  242,  concerning  assessments,  did 

not  change  the  manner  of  assessing  bank  property  for  the  year 
of  1895. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank,  160  Mo.,  640. 

8.  The  stock  of  banking  corporations,  organized  under  the 
laws  of  this  State,  must  be  assessed  against  the  shareholders 
personally. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Catron,  118  Mo.,  280. 

9.  Shares  of  stock  in  a  bank  need  not  be  assessed  at  their 
par  value.     They  should  be  assessed  at  their  actual  cash  value.* 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Catron,  118  Mq.,  280. 

10.  Where  a  delinquent  shareholder  fails  to  pay  the  taxes 
due  on  his  bank  stock,  no  property  of  the  bank,  except  the  prop- 
erty owned  by  the  delinquent,  can  be  sold  to  enforce  payment  of 
the  delinquent  taxes. 

Lionberger  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  67. 

Bank  vs.  Meredith,  44  Mo.,  500. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Bank,  87  Mo.,  441. 

11.  Although  a  bank  refused  to  furnish  the  assessor  with 
a  list  of  its  shareholders,  this  does  not  justify  making  the  assess- 
ment and  enforcing  the  tax  against  the  property  of  the  bank. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Bank,  87  Mo.,  441. 

12.  A  stockholder  of  a  banking  corporation  is  not  person- 
ally liable  for  taxes  assessed  against  the  property  of  the  corpor- 

ation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Catron,  118  Mo.,  280. 

13.  Where  a  bank  does  not  object  to  an  assessment  on  the 
ground  of  irregularity,  and  is  a  party  to  the  same,  and  the  as- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  85 

sessinent  is  substantially  correct,  the  bank  will  not  afterwards 
be  permitted  to  say  that  the  error  in  assessing  the  shares  to  the 
bank,  instead  of  assessing  them  to  the  shareholders,  makes  the 
assessment  void. 

Building  and  Savings  Association  vs.  Lightner,  47 
Mo.,  393. 

14.  Where  a  bank  returns  for  assessment  the  shares  owned 
by  its  stockholders  as  the  property  of  the  bank,  it  cannot  after- 
wards on  certiorari,  successfully  insist  that  the  property  should 
have  been  assessed  as  the  property  of  the  stockholders  and  not 
as  the  property  of  the  bank. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Springer,  134  Mo.,  212. 

15.  The  capital  of  a  private  bank,  invested  in  United  States 
bonds,  is  not  taxable  by  State  authority. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rogers,  79  Mo.,  283. 

16.  Section  32  of  the  Act  of  1856  and  section  12  of  the 
Act  of  1861,  created  a  binding  contract  between  the  State  and 
banks  incorporated  thereunder  and  exempted  them  from  all  lia- 
bility to  pay  other  taxes  than  one  per  cent,  of  their  capital  stock. 
Said  sections  also  prohibited  any  county,  city  or  town  from 
levying  or  collecting  any  tax  from  such  banks. 

Lionberger  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  67. 
Bank  vs.  City  of  Kansas,  73  Mo.,  555. 

17.  A  municipal  corporation  has  authority  to  levy  and  col- 
lect taxes  on  money  and  bank  notes  belonging  to  a  bank,  which 
was  organized  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  1857. 

Town  of  Paris  vs.  Bank,  30  Mo.,  575. 

18.  Although  a  bank  was  incorporated  under  the  laws  of 
1857,  which  provided  that  in  consideration  of  the  privileges 
therein  granted,  each  bank  incorporated  in  this  State  should  pay 
annually  one  per  cent,  of  the  amount  of  its  capital  stock,  and 
that  this  should  be  in  full  of  all  bonus  and  taxes,  it  was  held 
that  the  law  did  not  prohibit  a  city  from  levying  and  collecting 
a  tax  upon  the  property  of  such  bank. 

City  of  Lexington  vs.  Aull,  30  Mo.,  480. 

19.  Although  the  charter  of  a  bank  declares  that  one  per 
cent,  of  the  net  proceeds  of  the  bank  should  be  paid  to  the  State, 


86  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

for  the  use  of  the  Missouri  Institution  for  the  Blind,  this  does 
not  prohibit  the  State  from  levying  other  taxes  or  from  dele- 
gating that  power  to  a  city. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Savings  Bank,  49  Mo.,  574. 

20.  Section  7538,  B.  S.  1889,  draws  a  distinction  between 
the  manner  of  the  assessment  of  private  banks  and  incorpora- 
ted banks. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank  of  Neosho,  120  Mo.,  161. 

21.  The  business  capital  of  a  private  bank  is  taxable  where 
the  business  is  carried  on.     It  does  not  follow  the  situs  of  the 
owner. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rogers,  79  Mo.,  283. 


BOARD  OF  EQUALIZATION. 

1.  The  county  board  of  equalization  may  meet  at  the  branch 
county  clerk's  office  established  by  law  in  a  city,  instead  of 
at  the  regular  office  of  the  clerk. 

Such  board,  in  the  absence  of  a  statute  to  the  contrary,  has 
the  inherent  power  to  adjourn  from  time  to  time. 

The  tax  assessment  is  not  rendered  invalid  byjthe  board's 
meeting  in  the  court  room  instead  of  in  the  clerk's  office  in 
the  same  building. 

Wherever  the  county  board  of  equalization  may  meet, 
there  a  tax-payer  from  any  other  tov\oiship  has  the  legal  right 
to  present  his  case,  a  custom  of  the  board  to  the  contrary  not- 
withstanding. 

The  acts  of  the  board  in  the  performance  of  its  duties  can- 
not be  collaterally  impeached. 

But  being  a  tribunal  of  limited  powers,  acts  outside  of  its 
jurisdiction  are  void. 

The  State  Board  of  Equalization  has  no  authority  to  ad- 
just the  values  of  different  parcels  or  of  different  classes  of 
land  in  the  same  county. 

Its  power  is  limited  to  equalization  of  values  among  dif- 
ferent counties. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs.  87 

Although  the  act  of  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  in 

reducing  values  in  a  county  are  void,  still  the  assessment  by  the 
county  board  will  be  legal. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Vaile,  122  Mo.,  33. 

2.  In  adjusting  values,  county  boards  of  equalization  act 
judicially. 

Under  section  6672,  E.  S.  1879,  the  county  boards  may  raise 
the  assessed  value  of  real  estate  in  townships  by  a  single  order 
on  a  percentum  basis  for  each  township  where  in  their  judgment 
the  assessed  value  is  such  per  cent,  below  the  true  value. 

Where  a  board  of  equalization  makes  a  mistake  in  giving 
the  required  notice  of  its  meeting,  it  may  adjourn  a  sufficient 
length  of  time  to  have  a  correct  notice  published. 
Black  vs.  McGonigle,  103  Mo.,  192. 

3.  The  failure  of  the  members  of  the  county  board  of  equali- 
zation to  take  the  statutory  oath  before  proceeding  with  their 
duties  will  not  invalidate  the  equalization. 

Unless  required  by  statute,  the  oath  need  not  be  in  writing. 
An  api)earance  before  the  board  amounts  to  a  waiver  of 
objections  as  to  want  of  notice. 

State   ex   rel.   Lemon   vs.    Buchanan   Co.    Board   of 
Equalization,  108  Mo.,  235. 

4.  The  county  boards  of  equalization  in  hearing  complaints 
and  equalizing  assessments  act  judicially. 

Said  boards  have  power  to  equalize  assessments  on  real 
property  biennially,  not  annually. 

St.  Joseph  Lead  Co.  vs.  Simms,   108  Mo.,  222. 

5.  It  is  the  duty  of  railroad  companies  to  take  notice  of  the 
time  and  place  of  meeting  of  the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 
Acts  1877,  pp.  56-59. 

The  law  did  not  require  the  board  to  preserve  the  evi- 
dence upon  which  it  based  its  valuations. 

State  ex  rel.  Love  vs.  Railroad  Co.,   101   Mo.,  120. 

6.  The  county  board  of  equalization  is  without  authority  to 
add  property  to  an  assessment  list  in  the  absence  of  the  notice 


88  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

required  by  section  7537,  E.  S.  1889,  when  a  false  list  lias  been 

made. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cunningham,  153  Mo.,  642. 

7.  The  action  of  a  county  board  of  equalization  in  the  assess- 
ment of  property  is  subject  to  review  on  certiorari. 

Only  matters  can  be  reviewed  which  appear  upon  the  face 
of  the  record,  or  go  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  board. 

Under  said  act  the  county  board  of  equalization  has  the 
authority  to  increase  the  value  of  the  corporate  stock  above 
that  returned  by  its  cashier. 

Ward  vs.  Board  of  Equalization,  135  Mo.,  309. 

8.  One  aggrieved  by  an  excessive  assessment  has  a  remedy 
at  law  by  appeal  from  the  assessor  to  the  county  board  of  equali- 
zation. 

For  such  grievance,  therefore,  an  action  will  not  lie  in  equity 
to  enjoin  the  collection  of  the  tax. 

Bank  vs.  Staats,  155  Mo.,  55. 

9.  The  necessary  land  owned  and  used  by  a  railroad  com- 
pany for  side  tracks,  and  in  loading  and  moving  cars  is  assess- 
able by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 

Lands  not  so  used  and  not  required  for  the  purpose  speci- 
fied are  subject  to  assessment  of  local  authorities. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  135  Mo.,  618. 

10.  The  board  of  equalization  is  authorized  to  correct  and 
adjust  the  tax  books. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  County  Clerk,  57  Mo.,  223. 

11.  Under  section  7,  Act  of  March  10,  1871,  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  special  board  of  equalization  in  assessing  railway  property 
to  consider  in  aggregate  and  its  entirety  all  the  property  owned 
by  each  railroad  company  in  the  State. 

The  board  must  adjust  and  equalize  the  property  of  railroads 
with  each  other. 

Washington  County  vs.  Railroad,  58  Mo.,  372. 

12.  "Where  a  board  of  equalization  fails  to  hear  evidence  to 
guide  and  direct  it  in  equalizing  assessments  of  property,  its 
acts  are  invalid. 

Washington  County  vs.  Railroad,  58  Mo.,  372. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  89 

13.  At  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  the  State 
Board  of  Equalization  was  composed  of  the  State  Senate. 

Railroad  Co.,  vs.   State  Board  of  Equalization,  64 
Mo.,  294. 

14.  By  virtue  of  article  10,  section  18  of  the  present  Consti- 
tution, the  Governor,  State  Auditor,  Treasurer,  Secretary  of 
State  and  Attorney-General  constitute  the  State  Board  of  Equali- 
zation. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.   State   Board   of  Equalization,   64 
Mo.,  294. 

15.  The  Board  of  Equalization  is  required  to  keep  a  full 
record  of  its  proceedings  and  decisions;  but  not  of  the  evidence 
adduced. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.   State  Board  of  Equalization,   64 
Mo.,  294. 

16.  The  State  Board  of  Equalization  had  full  power  to 
equalize,  adjust  and  assess  railroad  property  under  the  Act  of 
1875,  and  this  act  is  not  in  conflict  with  the  Constitution. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.   State  Board  of  Equalization,   64 
Mo.,  294. 

17.  Legislative  boards  have  the  power  to  select  subjects  of 
taxation  and  to  exclude  or  exempt  other  subjects  and  thus  hold 
out  inducements  to  proposed  investments  of  capital  unless  there 
is  some  constitutional  inhibition. 

But  the  exemption  must  be  clear  and  unambiguous. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 

18.  Under  the  Act  of  1871,  the  Board  of  Equalization  was 
not  authorized  to  levy  taxes  upon  the  road-bed,  rolling  stock  and 
other  real  and  personal  property  of  railroads. 

State  vs.  Railroad,  77  Mo.,  202. 

19.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  to 
assess  all  the  property,  real  and  personal,  including  the  fran- 
chises of  telegraph  companies. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Western  Union  Tel.  Co.,  165  Mo., 

502. 

20.  Laws  of  assessment  and  collection  of  revenue,  should  be 
construed  with  reasonable  strictness. 


90  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

When  a  power  is  conferred  upon  a  particular  tribunal,  per- 
formed and  specified  as  such,  enactment  is  mandatory  and  must 
be  strictly  observed. 

Where  the  tax-payer  and  assessor  are  content  with  the  form- 
er's list  and  there  is  no  appeal,  the  board  of  revision  and  ap- 
peals, has  under  the  charter  and  ordinances  of  the  city  of  Glas- 
gow, no  authority  in  any  way  to  change  such  list. 

Noll  vs.  Morgan,  82  App.,  112. 

21.  A  mere  assistant  to  the  secretary  of  the  board  of  equali- 
zation has  no  authority  to  make  the  record  of  the  board. 

And  his  attempt  to  do  so  is  a  mere  mutilation  unless  made 
under  the  secretary's  direction;  and  if  made  under  such  direc- 
tion, the  secretary  may  correct  errors  and  mistakes. 

The  statute  does  not  require  the  approval  of  its  record  by 
the  board  of  equalization. 

The  absence  of  such  approval  cannot  impair  the  record's 
Jegal  effect,  even  if  the  board  were  required  to  sign  the  record, 
the  failure  to  do  so  would  not  invalidate  it. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wray,  55  App.,  646. 

22.  An  entry  in  the  record  of  a  meeting  of  the  board  of 
equalization,  to  the  effect  that  among  the  persons  present  was 
J.  J.  Pierce,  sheriff,  is  not  to  be  understood  as  meaning  that 
such  person  was  acting  as  a  member  of  the  board,  when  the  oral 
testimony  shows  that  he  was  merely  in  attendance  as  a  minis- 
terial officer  of  the  beard. 

An  objection  that  the  record  of  the  board  fails  to  show 
that  the  members  were  duly  sworn  is  of  no  force  where  the 
clerk's  uncontradicted  testimony  shows  that  he  orally  admin- 
istered to  them  the  statutory  oath. 

Parties  who  were  present  at  the  meeting  of  the  board,  and 
who  prosecuted  appeals  from  the  decisions  complained  of,  are 
in  no  position  to  complain  of  the  absence  of  statutory  notice 
of  the  meetings. 

Where  one  of  several  joint  plaintiffs  had  actual  notice,  this 
will  be  deemed  a  sufficient  notice  to  the  other  plaintiffs. 

Any  defective  notice  is  cured  by  actual  knowledge  of  the 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  91 

party  entitled,  and  by  his  appearance  and  being  heard  in  oppo- 
sition in  the  proceeding  objected  to. 

Taber  vs.  Wilson,  34  App.,  89. 

23.  Where  the  assessor  of  a  county  made  no  assessment  of 
the  property  of  a  railroad,  the  action  of  the  county  board  of 
equalization,  without  notice  to  the  railroad  company,  verbally 
ordering  an  entry  to  be  made  on  the  assessor's  books  of  an  as- 
sessment by  themselves,  of  taxes  against  the  road  for  said  year, 
is  a  nullity. 

A  county  board  of  equalization  has  power  to  increase  or 
diminish  valuations  made  by  the  assessor. 

Railroad  Company  vs.  Cass  County,  53  Mo.,  17. 

24.  In  a  suit  by  a  county  to  recover  taxes  assessed  by  the 
board  of  equalization  against  the  railroad  corporation,  the  State 
Auditor's  certificate  to  the  county  court  is  not  competent  evi- 
dence to  prove  the  action  of  the  board. 

The  record  of  its  proceedings,  which  the  board  is  required 
by  law  to  keep,  or  its  exemplification,  is  the  best  and  only  proper 
evidence  for  that  purpose,  when  attainable. 

An  assessment  of  valuation  made  by  the  board  of  equali- 
zation without  any  evidence  before  it,  would  be  invalid. 

While  the  Auditor's  certificate  might  be  so  imperfect  as  to 
justify  the  court  in  refusing  to  levy  the  tax,  yet  if  it  appears 
that  the  court  has  made  the  levy  upon  such  certificate,  its  action 
will  not  be  disturbed,  if  it  also  appear  from  other  testimony  that 
the  action  of  the  board  was  such  as  to  authorize  the  levy. 

Washington  County  vs.  Railroad  Company,  58  Mo., 
372. 

25.  Under  the  act  of  the  Legislature  of  3871,  it  is  the  duty 
of  railroads  to  take  notice  of  the  time  and  place  of  the  meeting  of 
the  State  Board  of  Equalization,  as  fixed  by  law. 

The  law  did  not  require  the  preservation  of  the  evidence 
upon  which  the  Board  based  its  valuation. 

Nor  did  it  designate  the  evidence  upon  which  such  valuation 
be  made. 

The  fact  that  the  Board  fixed  the  same  valuation  for  the  pre- 
ceding year,  as  that  for  the  year  1872,  does  not  raise  a  presump- 
tion that  the  Board  acted  arbitrarily  and  without  evidence. 


92  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

The  court  can  grant  relief  against  a  mistake  in  judgment  of 
the  Board  by  direct  proceeding  in  the  manner  provided  by  law. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  101  Mo.,  120. 

26.  Under  the  Constitution  of  1875,  officers  of  the  executive 
department  are  not  entitled  to  any  compensation  for  services 
rendered  by  them  as  members  of  the  State  Board  of  Equali- 
zation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Holladay,  67  Mo.,  64. 

27.  Under  the  Constitution  of  1875,  and  the  statutes  en- 
acted thereunder,  officers  of  the  executive  department  are  en- 
titled to  compensation  for  services  rendered  by  them  as  mem- 
bers of  the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 

(Overruling'  State  ex  rel.  vs.  Holladay,  supra.') 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Walker,  97  Mo.,  162. 

28.  Under  the  Act  of  1871,  all  railroad  property  was  re- 
quired to  be  valued  and  apportioned  as  provided  by  said  act,  by 
a  special  board,  consisting  of  a  State  Treasurer,  State  Auditor 
and  Register  of  Lands;  and  the  county  courts  of  the  several 
counties  in  which  such  property  was  situate  levied  taxes  for 
county  purposes  upon  the  apportionment  certified  by  the  county 
clerk  of  such  county  by  such  special  board. 

Under  said  act  county  assessors  were  not  authorized  to  as- 
sess the  lands  of  railroad  companies  situate  within  their  respect- 
ive counties. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  82  Mo.,  683. 

29.  Appeal  must  be  taken  to  the  county  board  of  equaliza- 
tion to  correct  an  assessment  against  a  bank  on  the  ground  that 
it  is  excessive. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank  of  Neosho,  120  Mo.,  161. 

30.  Where  a  statute  appoints  a  time  and  place  for  the  meet- 
ing of  the  county  board  of  equalization,  to  hear  objections  to  an 
increase  of  assessments  of  personal  property  by  said  board,  such 
statutory  notice  is  sufficient  to  answer  the  requirements  of  due 
process  of  law  under  the  Federal  and  State  Constitutions.     Such 
notice  as  the  law  requires  to  be  given  in  increasing  tax  assess- 
ments is  essential  to  the  validity  of  that  proceeding. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Springer,  134  Mo.,  212. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  93 

31.  The  necessary  lands  iipon  which  railroads  build  side- 
tracks, for  the  convenient  and  safe  moving  of  its  cars,  and  for 
loading  and  unloading  them,  are  assessable  by  the  State  Board  of 
Equalization  and  not  by  the  local  assessors. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  618. 

32.  Switch  yards  and  other  railroad  property,  belonging 
to  and  used  by  a  railroad  company,  as  a  means  of  traffic,  and  for 
the  purposes  of  a  carrier,  are  not  subject  to  taxation  by  the  local 
authorities ;  but  are  to  be  assessed  by  the  State  Board  of  Equali- 
zation. 

Lands  owned  in  excess  of  what  is  necessary  for  such  pur- 
poses, are  subject  to  taxation  by  the  local  authorities. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  162  Mo.,  391. 

33.  Only  the  length  of  the  main  track  of  a  railroad  is  to 
be  considered  by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  in  determining 
the  length  of  road  for  the  purpose  of  apportioning  its  property 
for  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stone,  119  Mo.,  668. 

34.  The  special  board  of  equalization,  created  by  the  Act 
of  March  10,  1871,  was  not  authorized  by  that  act  to  levy  taxes 
for  the  year  1871,  or  previous  years  on  the  real  and  personal 
property  in  specie  of  a  corporation  which  had  not  before  that 
act  been  subjected  to  taxation  in  any  form. 

State  vs.  Railway  Company,  77  Mo.,  202. 


BRIDGES. 

1.  The  Act  of  1877-,  p.  391,  providing  for  the  assessment 
and  collection  of  taxes  on  bridges  owned  by  joint  stock  com- 
panies, and  property  and  franchises  owned  by  telephone  and 
express  companies,  is  not  a  special  law. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Raihvay  Company,  (9th  App.,  532.) 
.   79  Mo.,  420. 


94  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs. 

2.  A  railroad  bridge,  though  constituting  a  part  of  the 
track  of  the  railroad,  if  used  as  a  toll  bridge,  is  taxable  as  a 
bridge. 

If  not  so  used,  it  is  taxable  as  part  of  the  railroad. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railway  Company,  89  Mo.,  98. 

3.  Under  section  6901,  E.  S.  1879,  a  railroad  bridge  owned 
by  a  railroad  company  and  used  as  a  part  of  its  track,  is  tax- 
able as  a  part  of  the  road 

This  is  true,  although  it  be  used  in  part  as  a  toll  bridge  for 
ordinary  travel. 

And  the  board  of  equalization  has  no  power  to  assess  it. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railway  Company,  97  Mo.,  348. 

4.  That  portion  of  the  railroad  bridge  across  the  Missis- 
sippi river,  lying  in  the  State  of  Missouri,  is,  while  owned  by  a 
bridge  company,  taxable  as  a  bridge  and  not  as  a  part  of  a  rail- 
road line,  although  operated  and  used  by  the  railroad  company 
under  a  lease. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bridge  Company,  109  Mo.,  253. 

5.  A  bridge  across  the  Mississippi  river,  the  legal  title  to 
which  is  in  the  bridge  company,  is  taxable  as  a  bridge  and  not  as 
a  part  of  the  railroad  to  which  it  is  leased. 

Under  section  7564,  R.  S.  1889,  a  tax  for  city  purposes  upon 
a  bridge,  is  invalid,  unless  by  authority  from  the  circuit  court 
or  the  judge  in  vacation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bridge  Company,  134  Mo.,  321. 


CERTIORARI. 

1.  The  actions  of  the  county  board  of  equalization  in  the 
assessment  of  property  are  subject  to  review  on  certiorari. 

Ward  vs.  Board  of  Equalization,  135  Mo.,  309. 
State  vs.  St.  Louis  Co.  Court,  47  Mo.,  594. 

2.  The  action  of  a  county  court  in  assessing  taxes  on  prop- 
erty, under  section  51,  W.  S.,  p.  1174,  is  clearly  judicial,  and 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.     .  95 

hence  the  right  to  certiorari  will  lie  to  review  its  action  in  this 
regard. 

State  of  Missouri  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  47 

Mo.,  594. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Dowling,  50  Mo.,  134. 

3.  When  this  writ  is  invoked  against  proceedings  by  a 
state  board  of  equalization  for  the  assessment  of  railroad  prop- 
erty, in  as  much  as  the  evidence  before  the  board,  touching  the 
value  of  such  property  is  not  required  to  be  preserved  in  the 
records  of  the  court,  it  cannot  be  examined,  nor  the  appraise- 
ment of  the  board,  based  thereon,  disturbed  by  the  Supreme 
Court. 

It  is  a  common  law  writ  and  can  bring  up  for  review  only 
such  facts  as  appear  on  the  face  of  the  record. 

Railroad  Company  vs.  State  Board  of  Equalization,  64 
Mo.,  294. 

4.  Pacts  cannot  be  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  court 
outside  of  the  return  made  to  the  writ. 

House  vs.  Clinton  County  Court,  67  Mo.,  522. 

5.  The  Supreme  Court  has  the  original    jurisdiction    in 
certiorari. 

A  proceeding  to  obtain  a  certiorari  to  quash  a  tax  assess- 
ment of  personal  property  by  a  county  board  of  equalization, 
which  involves  "the  construction  of  the  revenue  laws  of  this 
State, "  is  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

Certiorari  calls  for  an  exhibition  of  the  records  of  the  board, 
whose  action  is  called  in  question. 

It  is  a  proper  remedy  to  annul  and  increase  tax  assess- 
ment if  made  without  jurisdiction.  % 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Springer,  134  Mo.,  212. 

6.  An  original  proceeding,  by  certiorari,  to  quash  the  as- 
sessment by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  of  the  cars  of  the 
corporation,  if  the  petition  states  that  the, situs  of  the  property 
is  in  another  state,  and  such  allegation  is  not  denied  in  the  re- 
turns, it  will  be  taken  as  true. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stephens,  146  Mo.,  662. 


96  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

7*  The  county  board  of  equalization  has  no  authority  to 
add  property  to  the  list  returned  by  the  assessor,  unless  the 
assessor  first  gives  a  written  notice  to  the  board  that  the  person 
named  in  the  list  has  made  a  false  list  with  intent  to  defraud. 

Where  the  board,  without  such  written  notice,  adds  property 
to  a  list,  its  action  amounts  to  a  fraud  on  the  rights  of  a  citizen. 
Here  the  record  list  simply  includes  the  assessors'  valuation 
of  the  property,  whereas,  in  fact  the  board's  action  was  an  at- 
tempted assessment  on  property  which  had  been  omitted  from 
the  assessor's  list. 

And  the  record  of  the  board's  judgment  being  a  fraud,  the 
citizen's  remedy  was  not  by  certiorari,  to  have  the  record 
quashed,  but  to  plead  the  facts  as  a  defense  to  a  suit  on  the 
tax-bill. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cunningham,  153  Mo.,  642. 

8.  The  grant  of  the  writ  of  certiorari,  by  the  Supreme 
Court  is  discretionary. 

Where  a  statute  imposing  a  collateral  inheritance  tax  is  as- 
sailed as  being  unconstitutional,  it  is  held  a  pressing  reason 
existed  for  the  issuing  of  a  writ  to  the  probate  court,  where  the 
estate  affected  is  being  administered. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Henderson,  160  Mo.,  190. 


COLLECTORS. 

1.  A  collector  of  the  revenue  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis  is  en- 
titled to  a  commission  of  three  per  cent,  for  revenue  collected 
by  him  for  the  school  board,  on  the  amount  of  goods,  wares  and 
merchandise  returned  by  merchants  and  manufacturers. 

There  are  two  classes  of  revenue  for  the  collection  of  which 
the  collector  is  to  be  compensated  by  commissions  on  the  amount 
collected,  "current  tax  revenue"  and  "license  revenue." 

Board  of  Education  vs.  Ziegenhein,  156  Mo.,  313. 

2.  Under  section  604,  B.  S.  1889,  suits  to  collect  different 
city  taxes  should  be  brought  in  the  name  of  the  city,  at  the  rela- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  ^7 

tion  of  the  city  collector,  and  not  in  the  name  of  the  State,  at  the 
relation  of  the  county  collector,  under  section  7672. 

City  of  Aurora  vs.  Lindsay,  146  Mo.,  509. 

3.  The  remedy  provided  by  the  Laws  of  1897,  page  213,  for 
the  collection  of  taxes  due  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  by  an  action  in 
the  name  of  the  city,  is  cumulative  and,  as  provided  by  said  act, 
does  not  impair  the  right  to  maintain  an  action  therefor,  in  the 
name  of  the  State,  at  the  relation  of  the  collector. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cummings,  151  Mo.,  49. 

4.  The  action  of  the  assessor,  and  that  of  the  board  of  ap- 
peals and  of  the  county  court,  in  the  matter  of  taxation,  are  judi- 
cial; but  if  it  appears  from  the  tax  list  that  the  assessor  has  juris- 
diction over  the  property,  though  the  assessment  be  illegal,  the 
collector  is  not  liable  to  the  tax-payer  for  the  amount  collected. 

Life  Insurance  Company  vs.  Charles,  47  Mo.,  462. 
Railroad  Company  vs.  Maguire,  49  Mo.,  482. 

5.  Under  the  Revenue  Laws  of  1865,  a  sale  by  the  collector 
is  entirely  different  in  its  nature  and  requirements  from  that 
made  by  a  sheriff  under  judicial  process  issued  by  a  competent 
court. 

The  collector  acts  at  his  own  peril  and  by  his  own  advice, 
and  must  be  held  to  a  strict  performance  of  every  prerequisite  re- 
quired by  the  statute,  before  the  title  of  a  citizen  to  his  property 
can  be  taken  away. 

Abbott  vs.  Doling,  49  Mo.,  302. 

6.  A  county  collector  is  not  personally  liable  for  levying  on 
land  embraced  in  town  limits,  and  regularly  assessed  for  town 
taxes,  although  the  lands  were  used  exclusively  for  agricultural 
purposes. 

It  is  his  duty  to  collect  all  taxes  contained  in  the  assessor's 
list. 

He  has  no  discretion  in  the  matter,  except  where  property  is 
expressly  exempt  from  taxation  by  law. 

Walden  vs.  Dudley,  49  Mo.,  419. 
Lee  vs.  Thomas,  49  Mo.,  112. 


D— 7 


98  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

7.  Where  the  county  collector  acts  as  a  ministerial  officer, 
he  is  protected  in  executing-  the  mandate  of  the  court. 

Brown  vs.  Harris,  52  Mo.,  306. 

8.  Where  a  county  court  orders  a  levy  of  a  tax  to  meet  an 
original  subscription  of  stock  ordered  by  a  court,  on  a  railroad 
company,  and  the  collector  proceeds  to  enforce  its  collection,  a 
tax-payer  cannot  recover  back  the  amount  so  collected  from  him. 

Ruby  vs.  Shain,  54  Mo.,  207. 

9.  A  county  collector  is  estopped  from  setting  up  as  a  de- 
fense to  an  action  on  his  bond,  that  he  acted  illegally  in  collect- 
ing moneys,  and  for  that  reason  is  not  officially  responsible. 

Mississippi  County  vs.  Jackson,  51  Mo.,  23. 

10.  The  condition  of  a  county  collector's  bond  was  that  he 
should  pay  over  all  State,  county  and  other  revenues  for  the  two 
years  ensuing,  from  the  first  day  of  January,  1875,  while  by  the 
statute  (W.  S.,  p.  1178,  section  92),  under  which  the  bond  was 
made,  its  condition  should  be  that  he  pay  over  said  revenue  for 
two  years  next  ensuing  the  first  day  of  February  thereafter;  held 
that  the  variance  was  immaterial  and  did  not  affect  the  bond  as 
a  lien  on  the  collector's  land. 

The  filing  of  the  collector's  bond  for  record  imparts  notice 
like  the  filing  of  a  deed  for  record,  and  from  that  time  becomes 
a  lien  on  his  lands. 

Such  lien  extends  as  well  to  lands  subsequently  acquired 
by  him,  as  to  those  he  owned  when  the  bond  was  filed  for 
record. 

A  proceeding  by  a  motion  in  the  circuit  court  against  the 
county  collector  for  failure  to  pay  into  the  proper  treasury 
moneys  collected  by  him  is  not  ex  parte  and  may  be  resorted  to 
after  the  expiration  of  the  collector's  term  of  office. 
Wimpey  vs.  Evans,  84  Mo.,  144. 

11.  Where  a  county  collector  advances  to  the  treasurer  the 
whole  amount  of  taxes,  chargeable  against  him  as  collector,  and 
dies  before  the  expiration  of  his  term  of  office,  with  a  portion  of 
the  taxes  delinquent,  his  successor  in  office  is  not  bound  in  his 
official  capacity  as  collector  to  collect  such  delinquent  taxes  for 
the  benefit  of  the  deceased  collector. 


Digest  of  the  Rci'cmie  Laws.  £9 

He  could  not  be  held  liable  on  his  official  bond  for  collecting 
and  not  paying  over  such  delinquent  list. 

If  he  should  collect  such  list,  it  would  be  as  agent  and  not 
in  his  official  capacity  as  collector. 

The  representatives  of  a  deceased  collector,  who  had  macU? 
an  advance  of  the  taxes  to  the  treasury,  have  a  lien  for  the  de- 
linquent taxes  as  provided  by  Session  Acts  of  1857. 
State  vs.  Rollins,  29  Mo.,  267. 

12.  Where  the  collector  of  the  revenue,  in  his  settlement 
with  the  county  court,  has  settled  his  account  as  made  out  by  the 
county  clerk,  without  objection,  he  admits  that  the  payments 
have  been  properly  applied,  and  his  sureties  will  be  bound 
thereby. 

State  vs.  Smith,  32  Mo.,  524. 

13.  The  securities  upon  the  official  bond  are  liable  to  an  ac- 
tion for  the  wrongful  acts  of  the  sheriff  as  collector  of  revenue,  in 
levying  upon  property  to  enforce  the  payment  of  taxes  originally 
assessed  upon  property  not  subject  to  taxation. 

If  the  property  be  not  subject  to  taxation,  the  collector  is 
a  trespasser  if  he  levies  the  tax. 

State  vs.  Shacklett,  37  Mo.,  280. 

14.  A  collector  who  has  overpaid  the  amount  due  the  Union 
Military  fund,  under  the  Laws  of  1855,  cannot  require  the  au- 
ditor to  issue  a  warrant  for  his  reimbursement,  payable  out  of 
any  money  in  the  State  treasury. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Auditor,  37  Mo.,  87. 

15.  Settlements  between  county  collectors  and  county  courts 
are  merely  those  between  principal  and  agent,  and  a  suit  may 
be  brought  against  the  sureties  of  a  collector  without  a  prior  suit 
in  equity  to  set  aside  his  settlement  with  the  county  court. 

State  vs.  Roberts,  60  Mo.,  402. 

16.  County  courts  in  settling  writh  sheriffs  act  only  as  fiscal 
agents  of  the  county,  and  such  settlements  are  not  conclusive; 
but  are  open  to  the  correction  of  any  mistakes. 

State  vs.  Roberts,  62  Mo.,  388. 

17.  In  a  suit  on  the  bond  of  a  county  collector  for  failure  to 
pay  over  taxes  collected  by  him,  the  petition  being  good  in  other 


100  Digest  of  the  Revenue  LCIKS. 

respects,  will  not  be  held  insufficient  on  demurrer  for  failure 
to  state  in  terms  for  what  period  the  collector  was  elected,  or  his 
bond  given,  or  whether  the  collections  were  made  during  his  offi- 
cial term,  or  that  he  ever  received  any  credit  on  account  of  such 
taxes. 

Morgan  County  vs.  Lutman,  63  Mo.,  210. 

18-  Where  a  county -court  ascertains  a  balance  to  be  -3ue 
from  the  county  collector  to  the  county  and  orders  its  payment,  and 
on  his  failure  to  respond,  renders  judgment  by  default  against 
him  at  the  next  term,  arid  orders  execution  to  issue  thereon: 
Held,  that  the  action  of  the  court  was  judicial  and  subject  to 
review  on  certiorari;  that  the  provisions  of  the  law  under  which 
such  action  was  taken,  were  not  repealed  by  implication  by  the 
Act  of  1863,  providing  for  a  different  method  for  rendering 
judgment. 

The  general  statutes  of  1865,  section  19-26,  p.  228,  were 
never  intended  to  clothe  county  courts  with  the  general  powei 
of  overhauling  all  past  acts  of  collectors. 

If  a  settlement  has  been  regularly  made  and  approved,  it 
can  only  be  impeached  after  the  lapse  of  the  term  at  which  it 
was  made  by  an  ordinary  action  brought  for  that  purpose,  and 
in  a  proper  case  the  courts  will  correct  the  error  of  the  agents 
of  the  county,  in  approving  and  recording  an  improper  settle- 
ment, by  giving  judgment  against  the  collector  for  any  amount 
found  to  be  still  due  the  county,  notwithstanding  such  approval. 

Owens  vs.  Andrew  County  Court,  49  Mo.,  372. 

19.  The  action  of  the  county  court  in  allowing  a  claim  of  the 
county  collector  against  the  county  through  a  mistake  of  fact, 
is  not  res  adjudicata,  so  as  to  bar  a  suit  by  the  county  to  recover 
back  the  amount  allowed. 

In  making  this  settlement  the  judges  of  the  courts  act  merely 
as  the  fiscal  agents  of  the  county,  and  their  mistakes  might  be 
inquired  into  and  corrected,  as  well  as  those  of  an  individual 
acting  in  his  own  behalf. 

The  County  of  Marion  vs.  Phillips,  45  Mo.,  75. 

20.  Collectors  of  taxes  were  not  authorized  by  sections  1 
and  2  of  the  Act  of  March  20th,  1872,  to  institute  suits  for  taxes 


Digest  of  the  Rc-i'cnuc  Laws.  101 

against  railroad  companies  after  the  expiration  of  their  terms  of 
office. 

They  only  had  authority  to  continue  the  prosecution  of  such 
suits  as  had  been  commenced  while  they  were  in  office. 

Collectors  of  taxes  are  not  entitled  to  compensation  for  any 
efforts  made  by  them  to  collect  the  revenue,  their  compensation 
being  fixed  by  law,  of  a  certain  per  cent,  on  collections  actually 
made  by  them. 

Gordon  vs.  Lafayette  County,  74  Mo.,  426. 

21.  A  collector  cannot  escape  the  obligations  of  his  official 
bond  by  resigning  the  office. 

Howard,  et  al.  vs.  State,  8  Mo.,  361. 

22.  A  collector  is  not  liable  to  the  tax-payer  for  excess  of 
taxes  collected  and  paid  over  to  the  county,  above  the  legal  rate. 

Nor  ean  he  recover  back  such  excess  from  the  county. 

Lewis  County  vs.  Tate,  10  Mo.,  650. 

23.  Ail  addition  of  an  item  of  taxes  to  the  tax  book  by  the 
collector  is  void. 

Higgin  vs.  Austnus,  77  Mo.,  351. 

24.  The  sheriff  of  St.  Louis  county  had  authority  as  col- 
lector to  sue  for  taxes  and  to  serve  process  and  make  the  sale 
as  sheriff. 

Webster  vs.  Smith,  78  Mo.,  163, 

25.  Due  publication  of  notice  is  the  foundation  of  the  col- 
lector 's  authority  to  sell  for  taxes. 

Spurlock  vs.  Dougherty,  81  Mo.,  171. 

26.  The  collector's  failure  to  make  oath  to  the  delinquent 
list  does  not  affect  the  delinquent  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Schooley,  84  Mo.,  447. 

27.  Prosecutions  against  the  county  collector  for  the  collec- 
tion of  illegal  taxes  must  be  in  accordance  with  section  1487, 
E.  S.  1879. 

State  vs.  Green,  87  Mo.,  583. 

28.  If  based  on  an  unverified  tax  book,  the  collector's  re- 
port of  the  delinquent  list  will  be  void. 

Howard  vs.  Heck,  88  Mo.,  456.- 


102  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

29.  Under  the  Laws  of  1877,  the  tax  collector  was  entitled 
to  retain  his  commissions  on  collections. 

He  was  not  required  to  pay  them  into  the  county  treasury. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Alsup,  91  Mo.,  172. 

30.  Under  the  Laws  of  1877,  where  road  taxes  were  paid  in 
labor,  the  collector  was  entitled  to  credit  for  receipts  turned  in 
for  such  work. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Alsup,  91  Mo.,  172. 

31.  The  State's  lien  for  taxes,  under  a  valid  assessment,  is 
not  impaired  by  the  failure  of  the  collector  to  properly  return 
the  delinquent  list  or  by  the  failure  of  the  county  court  to  col- 
lect and  authenticate  the  same. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hurt,  113  Mo.,  90. 

32.  Settlements  between  a  county  and  its  collector  may  be 
inquired  into  and  mistakes  corrected  in  regular  manner  as  in 
cases  of  settlements  between  individuals;  but  such  settlements 
cannot  be  opened  or  avoided,  on  account  of  a  mistake  of  law. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ewing,  116  Mo.,  129. 

33.  County  courts  are  entitled  to  commissions  on  the  basis 
of  taxes  levied  and  not  on  those  collected. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ewing,  116  Mo.,  129. 

34.  An  officer  intrusted  with  public  funds  and  his  sureties 
are  prima  facie  liable  for  balances  for  which  his  official  books 
show  him  indebted. 

Pendmann  vs.  Schoenich,  144  Mo.,  149. 

35.  A  sale  of  land  for  taxes  by  a  county  collector,  under 
section  65,  p.  1171,  2  W.  S.,  1872,  based  upon  tax  books  unau- 
thenticated  by  the  seal  of  the  county  court,  is  without  authority 
of  law. 

Burk  vs.  Brown,  148  Mo.,  309. 

36.  In  a  suit  by  the  State  xiuditor,  on  a  collector's  bond, 
where  the  collector  by  demurrer  admits  that  taxes  were  levied 
against  certain  railroads,  that  they  were  properly  entered  upon 
the  tax  books,  that  the  books  were  delivered  to  the  collector,  that 
the  taxes  were  thereafter  collected  by  him,  and  that  he  failed 
to  pay  them  into  the  State  treasury,  and  who  fails  to  plead  over 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  103 

upon  the  overruling  of  the  demurrer,  a  judgment  for  plaintiff 
was  proper. 

Having  so  made  such  admissions,  it  did  not  lie  in  defend- 
ant's mouth  to  say  the  State  is  not  entitled  to  such  taxes,  nor  that 
the  railroads  were  not  the  owners  of  the  property  with  which 
they  were  assessed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Seibert,  148  Mo.,  408. 

37.  Where  a  tax-payer  has  funds  in  a  bank  sufficient  to  pay 
his  taxes,  and  the  collector  receives  his  check  for  that  amount, 
and  fails  to  present  the  check  in  due  time  at  the  bank,  and  the  in- 
stitution afterwards  fails,  the  collector  must  bear  the  loss,  and  if 
the  tax-payer  is  afterwards  compelled  to  pay  the  tax,  the  col- 
lector becomes  liable  to  him  for  the  amount  of  the  check. 

Choteau  vs.  Rouse,  56  Mo.,  65. 

38.  In  a  county  which  had  adopted  the  township  organiza- 
tion law  of  1873,  after  the  tax  books  of  the  current  year  had  been 
delivered  to  the  collector,  the  township  board  in  one  of  the  town- 
ships levied  a  special  tax  for  township  purposes,  and  the  clerk 
of  the  county  court,  by  order  of  the  board,  and  without  any  order 
of  the  county  court,  recalled  the  book  of  that  township,  and  ex- 
tended the  tax  upon  it. 

Held,  that  this  was  without  authority  of  law;  that  the  tax 
was  unlawful,  and  the  tax  book  was  no  protection  to  the  col- 
lector in  enforcing  payment. 

Henry  vs.  Bell,  75  Mo.,  194. 

39.  A  collector  can  seize  personal  property  by  virtue  of  the 
tax  book,  and  by  warrant  naming  the  collector  of  the  personal  tax 
appearing  in  the  tax  book,  although  the  latter  may  not  conform 
to  the  law  in  commanding  upon  its  face  a  description  list  of  the 
personal  property  on  which  the  tax  was  claimed. 

Dixon  vs.  Rouse,  80  Mo.,  224. 

40.  No  means  can  be  resorted  to  to  coerce  the  payment  of 
taxes  other  than  those  provided  by  statute,  and  the  only  manner 
in  which  the  collector  can  proceed  against  personal  property  for 
taxes  due  on  it,  is,  after  the  required  demand  and  notice,  to  seize 
it,  as  directed  by  the  revenue  law,  and  there  can  be  no  lien  on  it 
before  siezure. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Goodnow,  80  Mo.,  271. 


104  Digest  of  the  Re-rcmtc  La-^s. 

41.  Under  section  1833  of  the  revenue  law  of  1872,  a  collec- 
tor must  apply  for  judgment  against  lands  returned  delinquent 
at  the  July  term  of  the  county  court,  unless  for  good  cause  he  be 
unable  to  obtain  judgment  at  that  term,  when  he  may  apply  at  a 
succeeding  term. 

Kinney,  vs.  Forsythe,  96  Mo.,  414. 

42.  A  county  collector  is,  under  section  7640,  R.  S.  1889, 
entitled  to  commissions  on  the  taxes  levied  and  not  on  the  taxes 
collected  for  any  given  year. 

Taxes  specially  levied  to  pay  judgments  against  the  county 
on  railroad  bonds,  or  county  taxes  within  the  meaning  of  section 
7640,  E.  S.  1889,  are  to  be  included  in  computing  the  collector's 
commission. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ewing,  116  Mo.,  129. 

43.  An  error  by  the  county  court  as  to  the  amount  of  the 
collector's  commissions  is  a  mistake  of  law  for  which  a  settle- 
ment with  the  latter  cannot  be  avoided,  nor  any  excess  paid  him 
be  recovered  of  him  and  the  sureties  on  his  bond. 

In  the  absence  of  fraud,  collusion  or  mistake  of  fact  a  settle- 
ment made  by  the  collector  with  the  county  court. is  binding  on 
the  county. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Shipman,  125  Mo.,  436. 

44.  In  a  suit  by  the  city  against  its  tax  collector,  and  his 
bondsmen  for  his  failure  to  enforce  the  payment  of  a  certain  tax, 
it  must  be  both  pleaded  and  proved  that  the  proper  tax  book 
or  legal  warrant  was  delivered  to  him, 

City  of  Stanberry  vs.  Jordan,  145  Mo.,  372. 

45.  A  settlement  by  the  collector  with  the  county  court,  in 
which  he  was  allowed  certain  commissions  on  back  taxes  col- 
lected, is  binding  and  conclusive  in  the  absence  of  fraud,  collu- 
sion or  mistake,  whether  the  court  erred  in  aJlowing  the  commis- 
sions or  not. 

As  to  back  taxes,  the  collector  should  be  allowed  in  addition 
to  commissions  allowed  by  section  9260,  R,  S.  1899,  the  extra  fees- 
provided  by  section  9309,  as  costs. 
« 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hawkins,  169  Mo.,  615. 


Digest  of  the  .Rcrcmic  La^'s.  105 


CONSTITUTION,    ARTICLE    X.-  REVENUE    AND    TAXA- 
TION. 

Section  1.  Taxing  Power,  How  Exercised.— "  The  taxing* 
power  may  be  exercised  by  the  General  Assembly  for  State  pur- 
poses, and  by  counties  and  other  municipal  corporations,  under 
authority  granted  to  them  by  the  General  Assembly,  for  county 
and  other  corporate  purposes." 

1.  The  State  has  authority  to  create  a  police  force  for 
a  city,  and  compel  the  city  to  maintain  it. 

The  State  in  such  cases,  by  the  act  creating  the  force,  and 
prescribing  their  pay  and  directing  the  city  to  pay  it,  levies  the 
tax  and  directs  the  city  how  to  apply  it. 

The  city  does  not  levy  it,  and  cannot  say  she  has  assumed 
obligations  which  are  superior  to  charges  imposed  upon  her 
revenue  by  the  State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mason,  153  Mo.,  23. 

2.  A  legislative  act  to  be  sustained  as  a  police  measure,, 
must,  in  some  degree,  tend  to  prevent  some  offense  or  manifest 
evil,  or  have  for  its  aim  the  preservation  of  public  health,  moral 
safetly  or  welfare. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ashbrook,  154  Mo.,  375. 

3.  The  Legislature  is  vested  with  power  to  levy  either 
general  or  special  taxes.     This  power  may  be  delegated  by  the 
Legislature  to*  municipal  assemblies. 

The  State  may  collect  an  ad  valorem  tax  on  property  used 
in  a  calling  and  at  the  same  time  impose  a  license  tax  upon  a 
pursuit  of  that  calling. 

•  It  may  confer  such  power  upon  a  municipality. 

State  ex  ret.  City  of  Springfield  vs.  Smith,  138  Mo.,. 
645.     See  infra,  13. 

4.  The  Legislature  may  authorize  a  city  to  change  its  limits 
and  to  exercise  a  taxing  power  over  the  added  territory. 

Such  a  law  is  a  change  of  its  charter  and  not  a  local  or 
special  law. 

Copeland  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo,.  417. 


106  Digest  of  the  Re-venue  Latcs. 

5.  The  General  Assembly  may  appropriate  the  funds  of  the 
State  for  the  support  of  the  indigent  insane  in  the  insane  asy- 
lum of  the  city  of  St.  Louis  who  belong  to  the  city  outside  of 
the  State. 

This  is  true  even  though  such  asylum  be  a  private  institu- 
tion of  said  city  and  not  a  State  eleemosynary  institution. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Seibert,  123  Mo.,  424. 

6.  The  Legislature  may  impose  a  tax  upon  a  particular 
sub-division  or  municipality  of  the  State,  when  in  its  judgment 
such  tax  is  for  the  benefit  of  such  locality  as  well  as  the  State 
at  large. 

The  State  may  lawfully  use  the  agency  of  a  city  govern- 
ment to  collect  a  State  tax.  The  idea  of  equality  of  taxation 
lias  never  obtained  in  this  State. 

Equality  of  taxation  is  not  feasible. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Field,  119  Mo.,  593. 

7.  Taxes  illegally  collected  by  a  township  from  a  railroad 
under  an  unconstitutional  law  were  properly  paid  into  the  State 
treasury. 

Being  so  paid,  the  general  assembly  could  not  refund  them 
to  the  township. 

The  Act  of  the  General  Assembly  of  March  19,  1881,  pro- 
viding for  the  refunding  of  such  taxes  to  the  townships  by 
the  State  is  unconstitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  Prairie  Township  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  41. 

8.  Section  15  of  the  bill  of  rights  does  not  prohibit  the 
-enactment  of  retrospective  acts  which  do  not  disturb  private 
rights. 

State  ex  rel.  Kemper  vs.  Railroad,  79  Mo.,  420. 

9.  The  General  Assembly  may  grant  to  municipal  corpora- 
tions the  power  to  require  road  labor  from  all  male  residents 
between  certain  ages. 

And  may  leave  it  to  the  council  of  a  city  to  determine  the 
<class  between  these  ages,  which  shall  perform  the  labor. 

The  Town  of  Tipton  vs.  Norman,  72  Mo.,  380. 
See  infra,  11-13. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  ^  107 

10.  The  Legislature  has  as  much  control  over  the  revenue 
of  a  county  as  it  has  over  that  of  the  State,  unless  restrained 
by  some  provision  of  the  Constitution. 

Hamilton  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  15  Mo.,  5. 
State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Holladay,  70  Mo.,  137. 

11.  The  Legislature  has  the  right  to  delegate  to  a  city  the 
power  to  tax. 

Express  Co.  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  66  Mo.,  675. 
See  supra,  3-9;  infra,  13. 

12.  Power  of  taxation  belongs  alone  to  the  State,  and  can  be 
exercised  only  by  virtue  of  laws  passed  by  the  General  Assembly, 
and  there  is  not  such  thing  as  an  implied  power  in  a  county 
court  to  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Macon  County  Court,  68  Mo.,  36. 
De  Arman  vs.  Williams,  93  Mo.,  158. 

13.  The  State  has  the  power  to  tax  all  professions  and  may 
delegate  the  authority. 

A  city  has  no  right  to  compel  an  attorney  to  pay  a  tax  unless 

there  is  a  legislative  grant  in  the  charter  of  the  city  conferring 
such  power. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Laughlin,  49  Mo.,  559. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Sternberg,  69  Mo.,  289. 
Simmons  vs.  State,  12  Mo.,  271. 
Express  Co.  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  66  Mo.,  675. 
Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

14.  The  sovereign  power  of  taxation  and  appropriating 
taxes  is  lodged  in  the  Legislature  and  in  the  absence  of  a  con- 
stitutional inhibition  there  is  no  restraint  upon  the  exercise  of 
this  power. 

Railroad  vs.  Maguire,  49  Mo.,  490. 

15.  The  Legislature  has  the  power  as     general  proposi- 
tion to  repeal  a  temporary  rate  of  taxation  and  to  impose  a 
higher  rate  or  an  additional  tax;  this  by  virtue  of  the  State's 
sovereignty  over  the  whole  subject  of  taxation. 

Under  the  Constitution  the  Pacific  Railroad  Company  was 
liable  for  county  taxation,  notwithstanding  that  by  its  amended 
charter,  provision  was  made  in  a  law  for  the  payment  of  the 
State  taxes. 

Pacific  Railroad  Co.  vs.  Dulle  et  al.,  48  Mo.,  282. 


108  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

16.  The  Act  of  March  21,  1868,  authorizing  county  courts 
to  issue  bonds  to  pay  for  building  bridges  and  for  the  macadam- 
izing of  roads  is  consitutional. 

Steines  vs.  Franklin  Co.,  48  Mo.,  167. 
Bradley  vs.  Franklin  Co.,  65  Mo.,  638. 

17.  The  State  has  the  soverign  power  of  taxation  of  all 
property  which  is  not  exempt  from  State  taxation  by  the  laws 
of  the  United  States. 

It  has  the  power  to  enforce  the  collection  of  taxes  by  a  sale 
of  the  property. 

Abbott  vs.  Lmdenbowcr,  42  Mo.,  166. 

18.  An  act  of  the  General  Assembly  directing  the  county 
to  appropriate  part  of  its  revenue  collected  in  a  particular  way 
is  not  unconstitutional  as  being  retrospective  in  its  operation. 

The  acts  of  the  Legislature  providing  the  objects  for  which 
county  funds  could  be  appropriated  are  at  all  times  subject 
to  repeal  or  alteration. 

While  the  Legislature  cannot  take  from  the  county  its 
property,  it  may  direct  the  mode  in  which  the  property  may  be 
used  for  the  benefit  of  the  county. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  34  Mo.,  546. 

19.  The  Legislature  has  authority  to  provide  that  attor- 
neys' fees  may  be  charged  and  collected  as  costs  in  a  suit  to  en- 
force the  State's  lien  for  taxes. 

The  State  vs.  Kerr,  8  App.,  125. 

20.  Where  money  accrues  to  a  county  it  cannot  be  so  vested 
as  to  prevent  the  control  of  the  same  by  the  Legislature. 

Conner  vs.  Bent,  I  Mo.,  140. 

21.  The  license  fee  exacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  reg- 
ulating dramshops,  is  not  a  tax  in. the  meaning  of  sections  1, 
3  and  10,  article  10  of  the  Constitution. 

It  is  a  price  paid  for  the  privilege. 

Pursuits  that  are  pernicious,  that  are  detrimental  to  public 
morals,  may  be  prohibited  altogether. 

State  ex  rel.  Troll  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  109 

Sec.  2.  Power  to  Tax  Corporations  Not  to  Be  Surrendered. 
4 'The  power  to  tax  corporations  and  corporate  property  shall  not 
be  surrendered  or  suspended  by  act  of  the  General  Assembly. ' ' 

1.  The  power  of  taxation  will  never  be  considered  surren- 
dered unless  it  is  done  expressly  or  by  necessary  implication. 

The  charter  of  a  bank  declaring  that  one  per  cent,  of  the  net 
proceeds  of  the  bank  should  be  paid  to  the  State  for  the  use  and 
benefit  of  the  Missouri  Institute  for  the  Education  of  the  Blind 
does  not  prohibit  the  State  from  levying  other  taxes  or  dele- 
gating that  power  to  a  city  corporation. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Manufacturers'  Savings  Bank, 
49  Mo.,  574. 

2.  Not  only  the  original  stock,  but  all  after-acquired  capital 
stock  of  a  corporation  in  private  hands,  is  liable  to  assessment 
under  the  Revenue  Act  of  1864. 

Said  law  makes  a  distinction  between  the  liability  to  tax- 
ation of  the  property  of  a  corporation  embraced  within  its  cap- 
ital stock  and  of  the  shares  of  such  stock,  but  the  result  is  or 
should  be  the  same. 

In  either  case,  if  the  officers  of  the  corporation  pay  the  tax, 
they  pay  it  for  the  shareholders. 

St.  Louis  Mutual  Life  Ins.  Co.  vs.  Charles,  47  Mo., 
462. 

3.  Although  a  corporation  of  a  foreign  state  itself  cannot 
migrate  or  go  out  of  the  state  creating  it,  it  may  by  its  agents 
go  beyond  the  bounds  of  the  state  in  which  it  exists,  and  thus 
become  liable  in  other  states  to  service  of  process  upon  its 
agents,  and  its  property  locally  situated  in  such  states  may  be 
subjected  to  taxation. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Wiggins  Ferry  Co.,  40  Mo.,  581. 

Sec.  3.  Taxes  for  Public  Purposes  Must  Be  Uniform.— 
"Taxes  may  be  levied  and  collected  for  public  purposes  only. 
They  shall  be  uniform  upon  the  same  class  of  subjects  within 
the  territorial  limits  of  the  authority  levying  the  tax,  and  all 
taxes  shall  be  levied  and  collected  by  general  laws." 

City  of  Independence  vs.  Gates,  no  Mo.,  374. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

1.  Equality  of  taxation  may  be  regarded  as  one  of  those 
Utopian  visions  which  neither  philosopher  nor  legislature  has 
ever  yet  realized. 

Egyptian  Levee  Co.  vs.  Cummings,  27  Mo.,  495. 

2.  The  idea  of  equality  of  taxation  has  never  obtained  in 
this  State. 

Equality  of  taxation  is  not  feasible. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Field,  119  Mo.,  593. 

3.  Perfect  equality  in  taxation  is  not  attainable. 

De  Arman  vs.  Williams,  93  Mo.,  158. 

4.  Taxation  is  equal  and  uniform  if  all  persons  engaged  in 
the  same  business  are  taxed  alike. 

Express  Co.  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  66  Mo.,  675. 

5.  A  city  tax  when  not  uniform  as  to  all  property  within 
the  limits  of  the  city  is  void. 

City  of  Brookfield  vs.  Tooey,  141  Mo.,  619. 

6.  An  ordinance  is  unconstitutional  that  levies  a  license 
fee  against  butchers  that  is  not  uniform  throughout  the  limits 
of  the  city. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Speigel,  75  Mo.,  145. 

7.  Taxes  must  be  uniform  upon  the  same  class  of  subjects 
within  the  territorial  limits  of  the  authority  levying  the  same. 

The  unconstitutionality  of  the  exemption  clause  contained 
in  the  Act  of  March' "30th  (Session  acts,  1887,  p.  53),  renders 
the  whole  of  section  5  of  said  act  void. 

Copeland  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  417. 

8.  The  constitutional  provisions  as  to  the  equality  and 
uniformity  of  taxes  apply  to  property  and  not  to  taxes  on  priv- 
ileges or  occupations. 

In  the  absence  of  constitutional  restriction,  the  Legislature 
may  authorize  a  municipality  to  collect  a  license  from  private 
vehicles  using  its  streets. 

That  said  property  is  taxed  as  ad  valorem  does  not  interfere 
with  the  right  to  impose  a  license  tax  on  the  pursuit. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Green  et  al,  6  App.,  591. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Heinrich,  6  App.,  591. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs.  Ill 

9.  The  constitutional  provision  securing  uniformity  of  tax- 
ation is  restricted  to  property  alone  and  has  no  application  to- 
occupation  taxes. 

The  Constitution  does  not  preclude  the  division  of  things 
taxable  into  classes  and  the  imposition  of  taxes  bearing  equally 
upon  the  members  of  each  class,  although  unequally  upon  the 
classes,  and  the  courts  cannot  interfere  with  such  classification. 

An  ordinance  dividing  vehicles  and  teams  into  different 
classes  for  the  purposes  of  imposing  an  occupation  tax  does  not 
create  a  tax  on  personal  property. 

Though  imposed  for  revenue,  it  is  in  the  nature  of  a  license. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Richardson,  90  App.,  450. 

10.  An  ordinance  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis  taxing  a  lawyer 
without  regard  to  his  practice  $25  a  year  is  not  obnoxious  to 
the  constitutional  provision  which  requires  that  taxes  shall  be 
uniform. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Sternberg,  69  Mo.,  289. 

11.  An  ordinance  which  assesses  an  occupation  tax  against 
a  produce  dealer  who  is  clearly  a  merchant,  and  does  not  tax  a 
dry  goods  merchant,  is  unconstitutional. 

A  city  cannot  tax  some  merchants  and  exempt  others. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Grush,  151  Mo.,  128. 

12.  The  State  has  the  power  to  collect  an  ad  valorem  tax 
upon  the  property  used  in  a  calling  and  at  the  same  time  to  im- 
pose a  license  tax  upon  the  pursuit  of  that  calling. 

City  of  Aurora  vs.  McGannon,  138  Mo.,  38. 

13.  A  law  authorizing  the  collection  of  a  license  fee  of  $2 
on  merchants  with  a  stock  of  less  than  $1,000  and  a  fee  of  $3  on 
those  with  a  greater  stock  is  constitutional. 

City  of  Aurora  vs.  McGannon,  138  Mo.,  38. 

14.  A  tax  levied  on  patent  medicines,  under  the  collateral 
succession  tax  law  of  1895,  is  unconstitutional,  because  the  tax 
provided  for  is  not  levied  for  public  purposes. 

Simmons  Medicine  Co.  vs.  Zeigenhein,  145  Mo.,  368. 

15.  The  right  to  assess  for  taxation,  where  the  tax-payer 
is  not  found  at  his  residence  or  place  of  business,  attaches  upon 


112  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lati's. 

a  notice  being  left  by  the  assessor  at  either  place  between  June 
1st  and  January  1st,  requiring  the  tax-payer  to  make  a  statement 
of  all  his  taxable  property. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Cummings,   151   Mo.,  49. 

16.  A  provision  in  a  city  charter  permitting  discrimina- 
tion'in  the  levy  of  a  poll  tax  in  favor  of  those  who  vote  at  a  gen- 
eral election  discriminates  between  subjects  of  legislation  in  the 
.same  class. 

It  violates  article  10,  section  3  of  the  Constitution  as  to 
uniformity  of  taxation. 

As  it  authorizes  a  levy  against  those  who  fail  to  vote  and 
•exempts  from  the  tax  those  who  do,  it  is  subject  to  the  objection 
that  it  imposes  a  penalty. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Whipple,  136  Mo.,  475. 

17.  The  proviso  of  section  1466,  E.  S.  1889,  concerning  the 
-extension  of  the  corporate  limits  of  cities  of  the  third  class,  "that 
all  agricultural  or  pastoral  lands  included  in  such  extension 
shall  be  exempt  from  taxation  for  State  purposes  until  they  have, 
by  recorded  plats  or  sale,  been  reduced  to  tracts  of  lots  of  10 
acres  or  less,"  violates  section  3,  article  10  of  the  Constitution 
which  requires  taxes  to  be  uniform  upon  the  same  class  of  sub 
jects  within  the  territorial  limits  of  the  authority  levying  the 
tax. 

The  attempted  exemption  of  such  lands  from  taxation  is  void. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wardell,  153  Mo.,  319. 

18.  A  provision  in  a  statute  to  the  effect  that  all  railroad 
property  should  be  assessed  by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization, 
and  that  such  Board  was  to  ascertain  the  value  of  such  property 
within  the  limits  of  any  city  and  transmit  that  amount  as  the 
proper  assessment  in  favor  of  that  city,  and  that  their  action  in 
this  regard  was  exclusive  of  all  other  officers,  either  State  or  mu- 
nicipal, was  not  void  as  violating  that  provision  of  the  Constitu- 
tion which  declared  that  taxation  on  property  shall  be  uniform. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Severance,  et  al,  55  Mo.,  378. 

19.  The  Act  of  March  10,  1871,  providing  for  a  Board  of 
Equalization  for  the  purpose  of  assessing  railroads  and  their 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  113 

property,  does  not  violate  the  provision  of  the   Constitution 
which  declares  that  taxation  on  property  shall  be  uniform. 

State  vs.  Severance,  55  Mo.,  378. 
Washington  County  vs.  Railroad,  58  Mo.,  372. 
Pacific  Railroad  vs.  Watson,  61  Mo.,  57. 

20.  The  Act  of  March  18,  1895,  providing  a  State  tax  of 
2  per  cent,  in  lieu  of  all  other  taxes,  on  ' '  railway  cars  other  than 
those  which  are  the  property  of  railway  companies,"  imposes 
a  property  tax  as  distinguished  from  a  license  tax. 

The  property  tax  of  2  per  cent,  imposed  by  said  law  for  gen- 
eral purposes  exceeds  the  constitutional  limit. 

Said  act  provides  a  whole  scheme  for  the  taxation  of  such 
railway  cars  and  must  all  stand  or  fall  together. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stephens,  146  Mo.,  662. 

21.  The  license  fee  exacted  by  the  General  Assembly  reg- 
ulating dramshops,  is  not  a  tax  within  the  meaning  of  sections 
1,  3  and  10  of  article  10  of  the  Constitution. 

It  is  a  price  paid  for  the  privilege. 

Pursuits  that  are  pernicious,  that  are  detrimental  to  pub- 
lic morals  may  be  prohibited  by  the  State  altogether. 

State  ex  rel.  Troll  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 

22.  Section  3,  article  10  of  the  Constitution  did  not  repeal 
those  provisions  in  charters  of  cities  authorizing  the  levy  of 
taxes. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Johnson,  78  Mo.,  661. 

23.  A  water  rate  being  in  the  nature  of  a  toll  and  not  a 
tax,  higher  charges  for  one  person  than  another  are  not  pro- 
hibited by  that  part  of  the  Constitution  which  says  that  taxes 
shall  be  uniform  upon  the  same  class  of  subjects. 

Brewing  Association  vs.  St.  Louis,  140  Mo.,  419. 

24.  The  right  of  a  municipality  to  make  special  assess- 
ments for  local  improvements  is  not  affected  by  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1875  relating  to  the  uniformity  and  equality  of  taxation. 

Adams  vs.  Lindell,  72  Mo.,  198. 


D— 8 


114  Digest  of  the  Reveniw  Laws. 

Sec.  4.    Taxes  in  Proportion  to  Value.— "  All  property  sub- 
ject to  taxation  shall  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value." 

1.  The  mandate  of  the  Constitution  that  taxes  on  all  prop- 
erty shall  be  in  proportion  to  its  value  does  not  include  every 
species  of  taxation. 

It  enjoins  a  uniform  rule  in  imposing  taxes  on  property. 
It  does  not  abridge  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  pro- 
vide revenue  from  other  sources. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

Express  Co,  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  66  Mo.,  675. 

2.  The  contsitutional  declaration  that  all  property  subject 
to  taxation  ought  to  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value,  is  a 
prohibition  against  taxing  in  any  other  mode. 

The  word  "  ought "  as  therein  used  is  mandatory. 

Life  Association  of  America  vs.  Board  of  Assess- 
ors, 49  Mo.,  512. 

3.  The  Constitution  prohibits  discriminations  as  to  valu- 
ations for  the  purposes  of  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  O'Brien,  89  Mo.,  631. 

4.  The   constitutional    provision   that   property   shall   be 

taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value  has  no  application  to  local  as- 
sessments for  an  improvement  of  the  property  taxed. 

Egyptian  Levee  Co.  vs.  Hardin,  27  Mo.,  495. 

5.  The  19th  section  of  the  Declaration  of  Eights  "that  all 
property  subject  to  taxation  in  this  State  shall  be  taxed  in  pro- 
portion to  its  value, ' '  is  mandatory  upon  the  General  Assembly. 

Hamilton,  et  al  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  15  Mo.,  3. 

6.  In  levying  taxes  on  property,  it  sometimes  cannot  be 
avoided  that  the  same  value  will  be  twice  taxed;  but  this  does 
not  make  the  tax  levied  illegal  as  double  taxation. 

St.  Louis  Mutual  Life  Ins.  Co.  vs.  Board  of  Assess- 
ors, 56  Mo.,  503. 

7.  Taxing  shares  against  stockholders  of  a  corporation, 
and  also  the  property  represented  by  the  capital  stock  would  be 
duplicate  taxation. 

State  vs.  Railroad,  77  Mo.,  202. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  115 

8.  A  provision  in  a  law  that  the  payment  of  certain  fees 
by  life  insurance  companies  shall  be  received  in  lieu  of  taxes, 
cannot  have  the  effect  of  exempting  them  from  taxation. 

Such  provision  is  rather  an  exemption  than  a  commutation. 

Life  Association  vs.  Board  of  Assessors,  49  Mo.,  512. 
Life  Ins.  Co.  vs.  Board  of  Assessors,  56  Mo.,  503. 

9.  An  ordinance  of  a  city  dividing  vehicles  and  teams  into 
different  classes  for  the  purposes  of  imposing  an  occupation  tax 
is  not  a  tax  on  personal  property. 

Though  imposed  for  revenue  it  is  in  the  nature  of  a  license. 
It  is  a  privilege  connected  with  the  property. 
It  is  not  in  conflict  with  the  constitutional  provision  re- 
quiring all  property  to  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Richardson,  90  App.,  450. 

10.  The  provision  of  the  State  Constitution  requiring  all 
property  subject  to  taxation  to  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its 
value  does  not  require  that  all  property  shall  be  taxed. 

When  any  species  of  property  is  selected  for  taxation,  it 
shall  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value. 

State  vs.  North  &  Scott,  27  Mo.,  464. 

11.  Under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  no  state 
can  in  the  exercise  of  its  taxing  power  discriminate  in  favor  of 
its  own  manufacturers  as  against  those  of  its  sister  states. 

It  cannot  require  a  merchant  of  a  foreign  state  to  take  out 
a  license  from  the  state  authorities  while  it  levies  no  such  tax 
upon  resident  merchants. 

State  vs.  North  &  Scott,  27  Mo.,  464. 

12.  Section  3  of  the  Act  of  March  11,  laws  of  1873,  p.  283, 
extending  the  limits  of  Kansas  City  and  exempting  the  subdi- 
visions in  the  new  territory,  containing  over  five  acres,  from  a 
city  tax,  is  not  in  conflict  with  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution 
prohibiting  the  exemption  of  private  property  from  taxation 
and  requiring  all  property  to  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Cook,  69  Mo.,  127. 

13.  A  law  authorizing  the  collection  of  a  license  fee  of  $2 
on  merchants  with  a  stock  of  less  than  $1,000  and  a  fee  of  $3 
on  those  with  a  greater  stock  is  constitutional. 


116  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

A  city  of  the  fourth  class  may  levy  a  license  tax  upon  a 
pursuit  or  calling  and  at  the  same  time  collect  an  ad  valorem 
tax  on  the  property  used  in  that  calling. 

State  ex  rel.  Aurora  vs.  McGannon,  138  Mo.,  38. 

14.  The  right  to  assess  for  taxation,  where  the  tax-payer 
is  not  found  at  his  residence  or  place  of  business,  attaches  upon 
a  notice  being  left  by  the  assessor  at  either  place  between  June 
1st  and  January  1st,  requiring  the  tax-payer  to  make  a  state- 
ment of  all  his  taxable  property. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cummings,  151  Mo.,  49. 

15.  Taxes  should  be  uniform  and  levied  in  proportion  to 
the  valuation  of  the  property  taxed. 

License  fees  imposed  by  law  upon  those  who  pursue  partic- 
ular employments  are  taxes. 

Lawyers  and  physicians  may  be  compelled  to  pay  a  license 
fee  for  practicing  their  professions. 

There  are  three  general  classes  of  direct  taxes. 

First,  capitation,  having  effect  solely  upon  persons. 

Second,  ad  valorem,  having  effect  solely  upon  property. 

Third,  an  income,  having  a  mixed  effect  upon  persons  and 
property. 

The  Constitution  does  not  abridge  the  power  of  the  Legis- 
lature to  provide  revenue  from  other  sources  than  by  taxation 
of  property. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

Sec.  5.  Railway  Corporations,  Taxed  for  What  Purposes. 
"All  railroad  corporations  in  this  State,  or  doing  business  there- 
in, shall  be  subject  to  taxation  for  State,  county,  school,  mu- 
nicipal and  other  purposes,  on  the  real  and  personal  property 
owned  or  used  by  them,  and  on  their  gross  earnings,  their  net 
earnings,  their  franchises  and  their  capital  stock. " 
See  taxation  of  railroads,  infra. 

Sec.  6.  Property  Exempt  From  Taxation.— "The  property, 
real  and  personal,  of  the  State,  counties  and  other  municipal 
corporations,  and  cemeteries,  shall  be  exempt  from  taxation. 
Lots  in  incorporated  cities  or  towns,  or  within  one  mile  of  the 
limits  of  any  such  city  or  town,  to  the  extent  of  one  acre,  and 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  117 

lots  one  mile  or  more  distant  from  such  cities  or  towns,  to 
the  extent  of  five  acres,  with  the  buildings  thereon,  may  be  ex- 
empted from  taxation,  when  the  same  are  used  exclusively  for 
religious  worship,  for  schools,  or  for  purposes  purely  charitable : 
also,  such  property,  real  or  personal,  as  may  be  used  exclusively 
for  agricultural  or  horticultural  societies :  Provided,  that  sucli 
exemptions  shall  be  only  by  general  law/7 

1.  Under  the  Constitution,  the  property,  real  and  personal, 
of  the  State,  county  and  other  municipal  corporations,  is  exempt 
from  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Heman,  70  Mo.,  441. 
Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

2.  The  provision  of  the  Constitution,    exempting   certain 
property  from  taxation,  has  reference  only  to  general  taxation 
for  the  purpose  of  revenue. 

State  vs.  Linn  County  Court,  44  Mo.,  504. 

3.  Real  estate  used  as  a  cemetery  cannot  be  assessed  for 
taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wesleyan  Cemetery  Association,  n 
App.,  560. 

4.  The  Legislature  has  the  power  to  exempt  from  taxation 
lands  in  the  City  of  Palmyra  which  have  not  been  laid  out  in 
town  lots  and  which  were  valuable  only  for  agricultural  pur- 
poses. 

Lee  vs.  Thomas,  49  Mo.,  112. 

5.  Section  5  of  the  Act  of  March  30, 1887,  providing  for  the 
extension  of  the  limits  of  cities  of  the  second  class,  and  exempt- 
ing certain  lands  therein  from  taxation,  is  unconstitutional. 

Copeland  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  417. 

6.  That  part  of  section  1466,  E,  S.  1889,  exempting  from 
taxation  for  city  purposes,  pastoral  Jands  lying  within  the  cities 
of  the  third  class,  is  unconstitutional. 

Copeland  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  417. 
Westport  ex  rel.  vs.  McGee,  128  Mo.,  152. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wardell,  153  Mo.,  319. 

7.  Property  held  by  the  City  of  St.  Louis  as  trustee,  under 
a  law,  is  not  corporate  property  of  the  municipal  corporation, 


118  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

and  hence  is  not  exempt  from  taxation  by  the  Constitution  of 
Missouri. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Wenneker,  145  Mo.,  230. 

8.  Section  3  of  the  Act  of  March  llth,  laws  of  1873,  p.  282, 
extending  the  limits  of  Kansas  City  and  exempting  subdivisions 
in  the  new  territory  containing  over  five  acres  from  a  city  tax, 
is  constitutional. 

Said  section  is  not  in  conflict  with  the  provisions  prohibiting 
the  exemption  of  private  property  from  taxation  and  requiring 
all  property  to  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value. 
City  of  Kansas  vs.  Cook,  69  Mo.,  127. 

9.  Where  the  Legislature  exempts  from  taxation  a  class  of 
property  and  makes  no  provision  for  the  collection  of  taxes  al- 
ready assessed  against  it,  the  tax  so  assessed  cannot  be  collected 
after  the  exemption  is  declared. 

State  vs.  Academy  of  Science,  13  App.,  213. 

See  infra.  Sec.  7. 

See  also  exemptions  from  taxation,  infra. 

10.  The  property  of  a  county  or  city  which  is  exempt  from 
taxation,  is  that  which  is  owned  by  such  county  or  city. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Wenneker,  145  Mo.,  230. 

11.  The  buildings  erected  by  a  lessee  upon  real  estate  which 
is  exempt  from  taxation,  as  belonging  to  a  charitable  organiza- 
tion are  subject  to  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mission  Free  School,  162  Mo.,  332. 

12.  Section  5012,  E.  S.  1879,  exempting  from  road  taxes  the 
property  of  persons  residing  within  the  limits  of  an  incorporated 
village  or  town,  applies  to  property  within  such  village  or  town 
owned  by  non-residents. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  90  Mo.,  166. 

Sec.  7.  Other  Exemptions  Void,— "All  laws  exempting 
property  from  taxation,  other  than  the  property  above  enumer- 
ated, shall  be  void. ' ' 

1.  In  the  absence  of  constitutional  restriction,  the  Legisla- 
ture has  power  to  grant  exemptions  from  taxation. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railway  Co.,  65  Mo.,  123. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  119 

2.  An  attempt  by  the  Legislature  to  authorize  cities  to 
exempt  from  taxation  agricultural  lands  within  the  limits  of  a 
city,  is  void  as  being  in  conflict  with  sections  1  and  7,  article  10 
of  the  Constitution. 

Copeland  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  417. 

3.  That  section  of  the  Constitution  which  declares  that  all 
laws  exempting  property  from  taxation,  other  than  the  property 
enumerated  in  section  6  of  article  10  of  the  Constitution  shall  be 
void,  refers  only  to  affirmative  legislative  exemptions,  and  does 
not  refer  to  statutes  which  do  not  in  terms  exempt  certain  prop- 
erty, nor  to  mere  casual  exemptions. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Building  &  Loan  Association,  145 
Mo..  50. 

4.  The  law  of  1873,  Session  Acts,  p.  254,  providing  that 
the  City  of  Hannibal  should  maintain  the  streets  and  bridges 
within  its  own  limits  and  support  and  maintain  its  own  poor  and 
granting  certain  privileges  for  exemptions  to  citizens  of  said 
city,  held  constitutional. 

City  of  Hannibal  vs.  County  of  Marion,  69  Mo.,  571. 

5.  Where  an  express  contract  is  entered  into  between  a 
city  and  a  person,  whereby  certain  real  property  is  to  be  ex- 
empted from  taxation,  such  undertaking  is  void. 

Vrana  vs.  City  of  St.  Louis,  164  Mo.,  146. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Meier,  77  Mo.,  13. 

6.  A  Legislature  may  divest  itself  and  its  successors  of  the 
power  to  tax  corporations  and  persons. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 

7.  An  exemption  from  State  taxes  does  not  operate  as  an 
exemption  from  county  taxes. 

Railroad  vs.  Cass  County,  53  Mo.,  17. 

8.  A  state  cannot  impose  taxes  on  property  previously  ex- 
empt or  raise  the  rate  of  taxation,  unless  there  has  been  some 
express  contract  in  limitation  of  the  power. 

Railroad  vs.  McGuire,  49  Mo.,  490. 

9.  Legislative  bodies  have  the  power  to  select  subjects  of 
taxation  and  to  exempt  other  subjects. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 


120  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

10.  Municipal  corporations  have  no  power  to  grant  exemp- 
tions from  taxation,  or  to  commute  taxes  already  assessed. 

A  contract  which  undertakes  to  do  this  is  void. 

State  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  75  Mo.,  208. 
St.  Louis  vs.  Meier,  77  Mo.,  13. 
Vrana   vs.    St.   Louis,    164  Mo.,    146. 

11.  Exemption  from  taxation  is  a  non-transferable  per- 
sonal privilege. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  89  Mo.,  523. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  99  Mo.,  30. 

12.  Under  the  Constitution,  as  it  existed  in  1853,  a  Legisla- 
ture could  exempt  the  property  of  a  college  from  taxation. 

St.  Vincent's  College  vs.  Schaeffer,  104  Mo.,  261. 

13.  The  provisions  of  sections  6  and  7,  article  11  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  1875  and  1865,  respectively,  in  relation  to  exempting 
certain  property  from  taxation,  are  prospective  and  do  not  re- 
peal a  prior  special  law,  exempting  from  taxation  the  property 
of  a  private  corporation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  St.  Joseph  Convent  of  Mercy,  116 
Mo.,  575. 

14.  "Where  the  law  omits  certain  property  from  taxation, 
the  courts  cannot  direct  how  it  shall  be  taxed. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Building  &  Loan  Ass'n.,  145  Mo.,  50. 

Sec.  10.  General  Assembly  Shall  Not  Tax  Municipalities, 
When. — "The  General  Assembly  shall  not  impose  taxes  upon 
counties,  cities,  towns  or  other  municipal  corporations  or  upon 
the  inhabitants  or  property  thereof,  for  county,  city,  town 
or  other  municipal  purposes  but  may,  by  general  laws,  vest  in  the 
corporate  authorities  thereof  the  power  to  assess  and  collect 
taxes  for  such  purposes. ' ' 

1.  The  State  has  authority  to  create  a  police  force  for  a 
city  and  to  compel  the  State  to  maintain  it. 

The  State  in  such  cases,  by  the  act  creating  the  force,  and 
prescribing  their  pay  and  directing  the  city  to  pay  it,  levies  the 
tax  and  directs  the  city  how  to  apply  it. 

The  city  does  not  levy  it  and  cannot  say  she  has  assumed 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  121 

obligations  which  are  superior  to  charges  imposed  upon  her  rev- 
enue by  the  State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mason,  153  Mo.,  23. 

2.  The  license  fee  exacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  reg- 
ulating dramshops,  is  not  a  tax  in  the  meaning  of  sections  1,  3 
and  10  of  article  10  of  the  Constitution. 

It  is  the  price  paid  for  the  privilege. 

Pursuits  that  are  pernicious  and  detrimental  to  public 
morals  may  be  prohibited  altogether. 

State  ex  rel.  Troll  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 

3.  A  legislative  act  to  be  sustained  as  a  police  measure,1 
must,  in  some  degree  tend  to  prevent  some  offenses  or  manifest 
evil,  or  have  for  its  aim  the  observation  of  public  health,  moral 
safety  or  welfare. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ashbrook,  154  Mo.,  375. 

Sec.  11.  Rates  For  Local  Purposes— Limits— How  In- 
creased For  Schools  and  Erecting  Public  Buildings.— "  Taxes 
for  county,  city,  town  and  school  purposes  may  be  levied  on  all 
subjects  and  objects  of  taxation;  but  the  valuation  of  property 
therefor  shall  not  exceed  the  valuation  of  the  same  property  in 
such  town,  city  or  school  diatrict  for  State  and  county  purposes. 
For  county  purposes  the  annual  rate  on  property,  in  counties 
having  six  million  dollars  or  less,  shall  not,  in  the  aggregate,  ex- 
ceed fifty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation ;  in  counties  hav- 
ing six  million  dollars  and  under  ten  million  dollars,  said  rate 
shall  not  exceed  forty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation ;  in 
counties  having  ten  million  dollars  and  under  thirty  million  dol- 
lars, said  rate  shall  not  exceed  fifty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars 
valuation;  and  in  counties  having  thirty  million  dollars  or  more, 
said  rate  shall  not  exceed  thirty-five  cents  on  the  hundred  dol- 
lars valuation.  For  city  and  town  purposes  the  annual  rate 
on  property  in  cities  and  towns  having  thirty  thousand  inhab- 
itants or  more  shall  not,  in  the  aggregate,  exceed  one  hundred 
cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation ;  in  cities  and  towns  hav- 
ing less  than  thirty  thousand  and  over  ten  thousand  inhabitants, 
said  rate  shall  not  exceed  sixty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  val- 
uation; in  cities  and  towns  having  less  than  ten  thousand  and 


122  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

more  than  one  thousand  inhabitants,  said  rate  shall  not  exceed 
fifty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation;  and  in  towns  hav- 
ing one  thousand  inhabitants  or  less,  said  rate  shall  not  ex- 
ceed twenty-five  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation.  For 
school  purposes  in  districts,  the  annual  rate  on  property  shall 
not  exceed  forty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation :  Pro- 
vided, the  aforesaid  annual  rates  for  school  purposes  may  be  in- 
creased, in  districts  formed  of  cities  and  towns,  to  an  amount 
not  to  exceed  one  dollar  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation,  and 
in  other  districts  to  an  amount  not  to  exceed  sixty-five  cents  on 
the  hundred  dollars  valuation,  on  the  condition  that  a  majority 
of  the  voters  who  are  tax-payers,  voting  at  an  election  held  to 
decide  the  question,  vote  for  said  increase.  For  the  purpose  of 
erecting  public  buildings  in  counties,  cities  or  school  districts, 
the  rates  of  taxation  herein  limited  may  be  increased  when  the 
rate  of  such  increase  and  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  intended 
shall  have  been  submitted  to  a  vote,  of  the  people,  and  two-thirds 
of  the  qualified  voters  of  such  county,  city  or  school  district, 
voting  at  such  election,  shall  vote  therefor.  The  rate  herein 
allowed  to  each  county  shall  be  ascertained  by  the  amount  of 
taxable  property  therein,  according  to  the  last  assessment  for 
State  and  county  purposes,  and  the  rate  allowed  to  each  city  or 
town  by  the  number  of  inhabitants,  according  to  the  last  census 
taken  under  the  authority  of  the  State,  or  of  the  United  States ; 
said  restrictions  as  to  .rates  shall  apply  to  taxes  of  every  kind  and 
description,  whether  general  or  special,  except  taxes  to  pay  valid 
indebtedness  now  existing,  or  bonds  which  may  be  issued  in  re- 
newal of  such  indebtedness. ' 7 

1.  After  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  1875  and  until 
the  passage  of  the  Act  of  March  24,  1877,  no  authority  existed 
for  levying  taxes  for  school  purposes  exceeding  40  cents  on  the 
$100  of  value. 

Public  Schools  vs.  Paines,  62  Mo.,  444. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Holladay,  66  Mo.,  387. 
State  vs.  Railroad,  74  Mo.,  163. 
State  vs.  Railroad,  75  Mo.,  526. 

2.  The  limitation  of  the  present  Constitution  as  to  the  rate 
of  levy  for  taxes  applies  only  to  the  years  subsequent  to  its 
adoption. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  120. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  123 

3.  And  does  not  apply  to  a  debt  existing  at  the  time  of  its 
adoption. 

Levies  may  be  continued  until  the  indebtedness  shall  be 
paid. 

Stale  ex  rel.  Collector  vs.  Schooley,  84  Mo.,  447. 

4.  The  provision  of  the  State  Constitution  limiting  the 
rate  of  taxation  did  not  require  legislative  action  to  enforce  it 
and  went  into  effect  at  once. 

And  this  is  true,  notwithstanding  the  proviso  allowing  the 
rate  of  taxation  to  be  increased  by  legislative  action  and  public 
vote. 

St.  Joseph  Board  of  Public  Schools  vs.  Patton,  62 

Mo.,  444. 
Center  B'ld'g.  Co.  vs.  St.  Joseph,  108  Mo.,  304. 

5.  Section  11,  article  10  of  the  Constitution  of  1875  operates 
as  a  limitation  upon  the  power  of  the  General  Assembly  to  au- 
thorize cities  and  incorporated  towns  to  levy  taxes. 

This  section  was  self-enforcing,  but  of  its  own  force  con- 
ferred no  power  upon  cities  to  levy  taxes. 

Such  powers  are  derived  from  the  General  Assembly  and 
not  directly  from  the  constitutional  provision  in  question. 

State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Van  Every,  75  Mo.,  530. 

6.  The  constitutional  limitation  on  the  annual  rate  of  tax- 
ation cannot  be  exceeded  even  though  the  levy  be  made  to  pay 
a  judgment  against  a  county,  founded  on  a  warrant  issued  to 
meet  current  expenses. 

Arnold  vs.  Hawkins,  95  Mo.,  569. 

7.  A  tax  in  excess  of  the  constitutional  limit  cannot  be 
legally  levied  even  by  order  of  the  circuit  court. 

Black  vs.  McGonigle,  103  Mo.,  192. 

8.  It  is  the  purpose  of  the  present  Constitution  to  put  the 
business  of  the  county  upon  a  cash  basis. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Payne,  151  Mo.,  663. 
Railroad  vs.  Thornton,  152  Mo.,  570. 


124  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

9.  It  is  the  purpose  of  sections  11  and  12,  article  10  of  the 
Constitution  to  abolish  the  credit  system  and  establish  a  cash 
system  in  public  business. 

Reynolds  vs.  Norman,  114  Mo.,  509. 
Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387.       9 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Payne,  151  Mo.,  663. 
Railroad  vs.  Thornton,  152  Mo.,  570. 

10.  The  revenues  for  any  one  year  must  be  applied  to  the 
payment  of  current  expenses  of  the  county  of  that  year,  and  only 
the  surplus  after  these  have  been  paid  can  be  used  to  pay  war- 
rants issued  in  some  other  year. 

Nor  can  county  warrants  issued  to  meet  county  expenses  for 
one  year  be  received  by  the  collector  in  the  payment  of  taxes 
for  any  other  year. 

See  authorities  under  No.  9,  supra. 

11.  Under  section  11,  article  10  of  the  Constitution,  stocks 
of  goods  and  merchandise  form  a  distinct  class  of  itself. 

Such  property  is  not  to  be  included  in  determining  the  rate 
of  taxation  for  couny  purposes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  116  Mo.,  15. 

12.  An  annual  tax,  authorized  by  section  12,  article  10  of 
the  Constitution  is  not  within  the  limitations  of  section  11,  but 
may  be  imposed  under  the  conditions  and  restrictions  of  section 
12,  even  though  in  excess  of  the  rates  stated  in  section  11. 

(State  ex  rel  vs.  Columbia,  in  Mo.,  365,  overruled.) 
Lamar  Water  &  Electric  Light  Co.  vs.  City  of  La- 
mar,  128  Mo.,   1 88. 

13.  A  tax  in  excess  of  40  cents  on  the  $100  for  county  pur- 
poses in  a  county  whose  assessed  valuation  is  between  six  and 
ten  million  dollars  cannot  be  levied  unless  authorized  by  two- 
thirds  of  the  voters  of  a  county  voting  at  an  election  held  for  that 
purpose. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  169  Mo.,  563. 

14.  A  town  of  less  than  ten  thousand  and  more  than  one 
thousand  inhabitants  cannot  by  a  two-thirds  vote  levy  a  tax  in 
excess  of  50  cents  on  the  $100  valuation  for  the  purpose  of  pay- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  125 

ing  bonds  issued  for  the  construction  of  water  works  and  an 
electric  light  plant. 

.State  ex  rel.  vs.  Town  of  Columbia,  in  Mo.,  365. 
(Overruled  in  case  of  Lamar  Water  &  Electric  Light 
Co.  vs.  Lamar,   128  Mo.,  188.) 

15.  The  annual  tax  authorized  by  section  12,  article  10  of 
the  Constitution  is  not  within  the  inhibitions  of  section  11  of 
said  article. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  City  of  Lamar,  128  Mo.,  188. 
Water  Works  Co.  vs.  City  of  Aurora,  129  Mo.,  540. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  164  Mo.,  208. 

16.  Under  the  Constitution  a  county  court  cannot  create  a 
debt  in  excess  of  the  current  revenue. 

A  debt  in  excess  of  the  current  revenue  cannot  be  created 
for  the  improvement  of  county  buildings. 

Book  vs.  Earl,  87  Mo.,  246. 

17.  Unless  authorized  by  the  required  vote,  a  county  court 
cannot  levy  a  tax  for  any  purpose  in  excess  of  the  constitutional 
limit  of  50  cents  on  the  $100. 

The  limitations  contained  in  sections  11  and  12  of  article 
10  include  indebtedness  in  any  one  year  and  for  any  purpose. 

(Potter  vs.   Douglas   County,  84  Mo.,   230,   distin- 
guished and  overruled.) 
Barnard  vs.  Knox  County,  105  Mo.,  382. 

18.  A  law  authorizing  the  collection  of  a  license  fee  of  $2 
on  merchants  with  stocks  of  less  than  $1,000  and  of  $3  on  those 
with  a  greater  stock  is  constitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  McGannon,  138  Mo.,  38. 

19.  A  license  tax  of  one  per  cent,  imposed  by  a  municipal- 
ity upon  the  wares  of  a  merchant  cannot  be  upheld  as  an  occupa- 
tion tax. 

It  is  a  property  or  ad  valorem  tax. 

Being  in  excess  of  the  constitutional  limit,  it  is  void. 

City  of  Brookfield  vs.  Tooey,  141  Mo.,  619. 

20.  Act  of  March  18,  1895,  p.  246,  held  unconstitutional. 
It  imposes  a  property  and  not  a  license  tax. 


126  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

The  property  tax  of  two  per  cent,  imposed  by  said  law  for 
general  purposes  exceeds  the  constitutional  limit. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stephens,  146  Mo.,  662. 

21.  Eoad  taxes  are  county  taxes  within  the  meaning  of 
section  11,  article  10  of  the  Constitution  and  cannot  be  levied  in 
excess  of  the  limitations  imposed  thereby. 

The  limitation  so  imposed  cannot  be  evaded  by  organizing 
into  townships  for  road  purposes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  145  Mo.,  596. 

22.  Township  taxes  imposed  under  the  township  organiza- 
tion law  are  taxes  for  "county  purposes"  within  article  10,  sec- 
tion 11  of  the  Constitution  of  1875. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  123  Mo.,  72. 

23.  Under  sections  11  and  12  of  article  10  of  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1875  and  the  statutes  passed  in  pursuance  thereof,  two 
ways  are  provided  by  which  a  school  house  may  be  built.     One  is 
to  levy  a  tax  and  build  it  with  the  funds  thus  provided.     The 
other  is  to  authorize  the  issuance  of  bonds  by  a  two-thirds  vote 
of  the  qualified  voters. 

The  levy  of  a  tax  to  pay  annual  interest  and  to  create  a 
sinking  fund  to  pay  the  principal,  is  the  unavoidable  concom- 
itant of  the  constitutional  authority  to  incur  indebtedness. 
Benton  vs.  Scott,  168  Mo.,  378. 

24.  "Warrants  issued  for  the  payment  of  a  judgment  ren- 
dered on  county  bonds  issued  prior  to  the  adoption  of  the  pres- 
ent Constitution  and  paid,  are  not  charges  under  section  11, 
article  10  of  said  Constitution  on  the  general  fund  of  the  year. 

Such  warrants  cannot  by  reason  of  their  priority  affect  the 
validity  of  other  warrants  drawn  on  such  fund  during  the  year. 

Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387. 
(Overruled  in  Railroad  vs.  Thornton,  152  Mo.,  570.) 

Sec.  12.  Municipal  Indebtedness,  Limit  of.— "No  county, 
city,  town,  township,  school  district  or  other  political  corpora- 
tion or  subdivision  of  the  State  shall  be  allowed  to  become  in- 
debted in  any  manner  or  for  any  purpose  to  an  amount  exceeding 
in  any  year  the  income  and  revenue  provided  for  such  year, 
without  the  assent  of  two-thirds  of  the  voters  thereof  voting  at 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  127 

an  election  to  be  held  for  that  purpose ;  nor  in  cases  requiring 
such  assent  shall  any  indebtedness  be  allowed  to  be  incurred  to 
an  amount  including  existing  indebtedness,  in  the  aggregate 
exceeding  five  per  centum  on  the  value  of  the  taxable  property 
therein,  to  be  ascertained  by  the  assessment  next  before  the  last 
assessment  for  State  and  county  purposes,  previous  to  the  in- 
curring of  such  indebtedness :  Provided,  that  with  such  assent 
any  county  may  be  allowed  to  become  indebted  to  a  larger 
amount  for  the  erection  of  a  courthouse  or  jail.  And  provided 
further,  that  any  county,  city,  town,  township,  school  district 
or  other  political  corporation  or  subdivision  of  the  State,  in- 
curring any  indebtedness  requiring  the  assent  of  the  voters  as 
aforesaid,  shall,  before  or  at  the  time  of  doing  so,  provide  for 
the  collection  of  an  annual  tax  sufficient  to  pay  the  interest  on 
such  indebtedness  as  it  falls  due,  and  also  to  constitute  a  sinking 
fund  for  payment  of  the  principal  thereof,  within  twenty  years 
from  the  time  of  contracting  the  same." 

1.  Section  12,  article  10  of  the  Constitution  limiting  ex- 
penditures does  not  apply  to  debts  incurred  by  the  county  court 
for  the  keeping  and  transporting  of  prisoners  by  the  sheriff  or 
jailer  of  another  county. 

Potter  vs.  Douglas  County,  87  Mo.,  239. 
(Overruled  in  Barnard  vs.  Knox  County,  105  Mo., 
382.) 

2.  The  words  ' '  existing  indebtedness, ' '  within  the  meaning 
of  the  Constitution,  apply  as  well  to  a  debt  regularly  created 
after  its  adoption  under  the  provisions  of  the  school  law  as  to 
debts  existing  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
of  1875. 

After  a  school  board  has  issued  bonds  by  authority  of  a 
vote,  the  school  board  may  thereafter  determine  the  rate  of  tax- 
ation to  be  levied  for  the  payment  of  interest  on  the  same  with- 
out submitting  the  question  of  rate  to  the  voters  of  the  district, 

Benton  vs.  Scott,  168  Mo.,  378. 

3.  The  taxation  of  50  cents  on  the  $100  valuation  for  gen- 
eral revenue,  and  an  additional  tax  of  25  cents  for  sinking  fund 
and  interest  may  be  properly  levied  by  a  city  of  the  fourth  class, 
if  the  debt  thereby  sought  to  be  paid  was  made  for  any  of  the 


128  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

purposes  and  in  the  ways  mentioned  in  section  12,  article  10  of 
the  Constitution. 

City  of  Stanberry  vs.  Jordan,  145  Mo.,  372. 

4.  County  warrants  for  a  past  indebtedness,  though  valid, 
cannot  be  paid  from  the  revenue  provided  for  current  expenses, 
until  all  the  warrants  drawn  for  the  expenses  for  the  year  for 
which  the  taxes  are  levied  have  been  paid. 

After  the  payment  of  the  warrants  drawn  for  the  expenses 
for  the  current  year,  the  surplus  revenue,  if  any,  may  be  applied 
to  the  payment  of  warrants  of  a  preceding  year. 

Andrew  County  vs.  Schell,  135  Mo.,  31. 

5.  A  contract  by  a  city  to  pay  a  fixed  price  annually  for 
twenty  years  for  furnishing  water  does  not  create  an  indebted- 
ness on  the  part  of  the  city  within  the  meaning  of  section  12, 
article  10  of  the  Constitution. 

Saleno  vs.  City  of  Neosho,  127  Mo.,  627. 
Water  Works  Co.  vs.  City  of  Lamar,  128  Mo.,  188. 
Water  Co.  vs.  City  of  Neosho,  136  Mo.,  498. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  164  Mo.,  208. 
City  of  Lexington  ex  rel.  vs.  Lafayette  County  Bank, 
165   Mo..  671. 

6.  The  annual  tax  authorized  by  section  12,  article  10  of  the 

Constitution  is  not  within  the  inhibitions  of  section  11  of  said 
article. 

See  Nos.   14  and   15,  supra. 

7.  In  determining  what  constitutes  the  income  and  revenue 
provided  for  one  year,  within'the  meaning  of  section  12,  article 
10  of  the  Constitution,  all  sources  of  income  including  that  from 
licenses  should  be  estimated. 

Lamar  W.  £  El.  Co.  vs.  City  of  Lamar,  128  Mo.,  188. 

8.  It  is  the  purpose  of  the  present  Constitution  to  put  the 
business  of  a  county  upon  a  cash  basis. 

See  Nos.  8  and  9  under  Sec.  1 1  swpra. 

9.  The  provision  of  the  State  Constitution  limiting  the  rate 
of  taxation  did  not  require  legislative  action  to  enforce  it  and 
went  into  effect  upon  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution. 

See  No.  4  under  Sec.  n,  supra. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  129 

10.  A  tax  in  excess  of  40  cents  on  the  $100  for  county  pur- 
poses in  a  county  whose  assessed  valuation  is  between  six  and 
ten  million  dollars  cannot  be  levied  except  by  authority  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  voters  of  a  county  voting  at  an  election  held  for 
that  purpose. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  169  Mo.,  563. 

11.  Unless  authorized  by  the  required  vote,  the  county 
court  cannot  levy  a  tax  for  any  purpose  in  excess  of  the  consti- 
tutional limit  of  50  cents  on  the  $100. 

Barnard  vs.  Kno'K  County,  105  Mo.,  382. 

12.  The  levy  of  a  tax  to  pay  annual  interest  and  to  create 
a  sinking  fund  to  pay  the  principal,  is  the  unavoidable  concom- 
itant of  the  constitutional  authority  to  incur  indebtedness. 

Benton  vs.  Scott,  168  Mo.,  378. 

Sec.  18.  State  Board  of  Equalization— Members.— "  There 
shall  be  a  State  Board  of  Equalization,  consisting  of  the  Gover- 
nor, State  Auditor,  State  Treasurer,  Secretary  of  State  and 
Attorney-General.  The  duty  of  said  board  shall  be  to  adjust 
and  equalize  the  valuation  of  real  and  personal  property  among 
the  several  counties  in  the  State,  and  it  shall  perform  such  other 
duties  as  are  or  may  be  prescribed  by  law. ' ' 

1.  The  Act  of  March  10,  1871,  providing  for  a  Board  of 
Equalization  for  the  purpose  of  assessing  railroads  and  their 
property,  does  not  violate  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution, 
which  declare  that  taxation  on  property  shall  be  uniform. 

State  vs.  Severance,  55  Mo.,  378. 
Washington  County  vs.  Railroad,  58  Mo.,  372. 
Pacific  Railroad  vs.  Watson,  61  Mo.,  67. 

2.  A  law  requiring  all  roalroad  property  to  be  assessed  by 
the  State  Board  of  Equalization ;  and  that  said  Board  ascertain 
the  value  of  such  property  within  the  limits  of  any  city  and 
transmit  that  amount  as  the  proper  assessment  in  favor  of  the 
city  is  not  void  as  violating  that  provision  of  the  Constitution 
which  declares  that  taxation  on  property  shall  be  uniform. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Severance,  55  Mo.,  378. 


D— 9 


130  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

3.  By  virtue  of  section  18,  article  10  of  the  Constitution, 
the  Governor,  State  Auditor,  Treasurer,  Secretary  of  State  and 
Attorney-General  are  constituted  the  State  Board  of  Equaliza- 
tion. 

Railroad  vs.  State  Board  of  Equalization,  64  Mo., 
294. 

Sec.  19.  Money  to  Be  Paid  as  Appropriated— Limit— How 
Continued— Receipts  and  Expenditures.— "No  moneys  shall  ever 
be  paid  out  of  the  treasury  of  this  State,  or  any  of  the  funds 
under  its  management,  except  in  pursuance  of  an  appropriation 
by  law;  nor  unless  such  payment  be  made,  or  a  warrant  shall 
have  issued  therefor,  within  two  years  after  the  passage  of  such 
appropriation  act ;  and  every  such  law,  making  a  new  appropria- 
tion, or  continuing  or  reviving  an  appropriation,  shall  distinctly 
specify  the  sum  appropriated,  and  the  object  to  which  it  is  to  be 
applied;  and  it  shall  not  be  sufficient  to  refer  to  any  other  law 
to  fix  such  sum  or  object.  A  regular  statement  and  account  of 
the  receipts  and  expenditures  of  all  public  money  shall  be  pub- 
lished from  time  to  time. ' ' 

1.  A  law  of  the  General  Assembly  appropriating  money  out 
of  the  treasury  of  the  State  is  unconstitutional  where  it  fails  to 
specify  the  sum  appropriated  and  the  object  to  which  it  is  to  be 
applied. 

This  is  true  even  though  the  law  appropriates  a  balance  of 
a  prior  appropriation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Seibert,  99  Mo.,  122. 


CONSTITUTION,  GENERALLY. 

Section  4,  article  2.— While  the  Constitution  guarantees  to 
every  cne  the  right  to  "the  enjoyment  of  the  gains  of  his  own 
industry, ' '  this  is  not  an  absolute  right. 

It  is  subordinate  to  the  police  power. 

It  is  immaterial  that  a  license  tax  for  the  privilege  of  carry- 
ing on  a  business  is  against  the  occupation  and  not  against  the 
property. 

St.  Louis  vs.  McCann,  157  Mo.,  301. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazi's.  ]31 

Section  16,  article  2  of  the  Constitution  of  1865  was  not  de- 
signed to  act  retrospectively. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 

Section  21,  article  2.— An  act  of  the  Legislature  directing  a 
county  to  appropriate  part  of  its  funds  to  pay  a  portion  of  the 
police  expenses  of  a  city  is  not  an  application  of  property  to 
private  uses. 

Nor  is  it  the  taking  of  private  property  for  a  public  use, 
the  police  commissioners  being  an  agency  of  the  State  govern- 
ment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  34  Mo., 
546. 

Section  28,  article  4.— The  Act  of  April  1,  1891,  relating  to 
the  assessment  of  banking  property  is  constitutional. 

State  ex  rel  Ward  vs.  Board  of  Equalization,   135 
Mo.,  309. 

Section  47,  article  4.— The  Act  of  the  General  Assembly  of 
April  9th,  1895,  providing  pensions  for  persons  who  served  as 
policemen  in  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  is  unconstitutional  for  the 
reason  that  it  is  a  grant  of  public  money  in  aid  of  or  to  an  in- 
dividual. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Zeigenhein,  144  Mo.,  283. 

Section  5,  article  8.— E.  S.  1889,  sections  987-1013,  authoriz- 
ing the  payment  of  the  costs  of  an  election  and  of  the  office  of  the 
recorder  of  voters  in  cities  having  a  population  more  than 
100,000  equally  out  of  the  county  and  city  treasuries  are  not  un- 
constitutional as  authorizing  the  levy  of  a  municipal  tal  for 
other  than  local  purposes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Owsley,  122  Mo.,  68. 

Section  8,  article  9.— Section  8,  article  9  of  the  Constitution 
of  1865  amounts  to  a  mandate  to  the  Legislature,  and  provides 
the  means  of  sustaining  a  free  school  in  each  district  in  the 
State,  at  least  four  months  in  each  year. 

It  does  not  prohibit  a  more  liberal  provision. 
Sharp  vs.  Miller,  65  Mo.,  50. 

Section  14,  article  11. --Under  the  Act  of  January  24,  1870, 
Phelps  county  could  not  legally  issue  bonds  in  aid  of  the  School 


132  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

of  Mines  except  by  sanction  of  two-thirds  of  the  voters  of  the 
county. 

Sec.  14,  article  11  of  the  State  Constitution  was  not  in- 
tended to  be  limited  to  private  corporations,  but  applies  as  well 
to  those  of  a  public  nature. 

State  vs.  Curators  State  University,  57  Mo.,   178. 

Section  14,  article  11  of  the  State  Constitution  refers  to 
municipal  corporations  and  stockholders  who  loan  their  credit 
to  private  companies,  and  has  no  application  to  a  case  where  a 
town  loans  its  credit  for  public  school  purposes. 

State  ex  rel.  Dome  et  al  vs.  Wilcox,  45  Mo.,  458. 

The  Legislature  had  power  under  the  Constitution  of  1865 
to  authorize  townships  to  subscribe  to  the  stock  of  railroad 
companies,  but  subject  to  the  restrictions  contained  in  section 
14,  article  11,  which  prohibited  the  making  of  such  subscriptions 
without  the  assent  of  two-thirds  of  the  qualified  voters. 

The  township  Aid  Act  of  1868  held  constitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  Woodson  vs.  Brassfield,  67  Mo.,  331. 
(Chrerruled  in  Webb  vs.  Lafayette  Co.,  67  Mo.,  353.) 

ANTI  DEPARTMENT  STORE  ACT. 
(Laws  of  1899,  p.  72.) 

Said  act  is  unconstitutional. 

It  shows  upon  its  face  that  regulation  is  not  its  purpose, 
but  that  revenue,  or  undue  restriction  is  the  aim  in  view. 

It  simply  imposes  a  license  fee  although  its  title  indicates 
that  it  is  an  act  to  regulate  the  business  and  trade. 

By  it  the  General  Assembly  attempted  directly  to  exer- 
cise the  power  to  impose  an  occupation  tax  for  said  purposes. 

The  General  Assembly  act  only  conferred  this  power  upon 
officers  of  municipalities  by  a  general  law. 

If  it  imposes  a  State  tax,  then  there  is  no  authority  in  the 
Legislature  to  remit  two-thirds  of  it  to  the  State. 

It  is  unconstitutional  in  that  it  gives  the  license  commis- 
sioner power  to  fix  the  amount  of  tax  anywhere  between  a  maxi- 
mum and  a  minimum  amount. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laufs.  133 

An  undetermined  tax  is  in  law  no  tax.  It  makes  an  arbi- 
trary class  of  cases  of  certain  merchants  rmon  whom  it  fixes  a 
license  fee  and  exempts  all  others  therefrom. 

It  fails  to  provide  or  guarantee  uniformity  of  taxation. 

It  does  not  prescribe  the  life  or  duration  of  the  license 
required  by  it,  and  is  therefore  void  for  uncertainty. 

It  is  void  because  it  does  not  constitute  a  rule  of  con- 
duct and  is  incomplete. 

It  violates  the  natural  rights  of  citizens  as  defined  in  the 
Constitution. 

It  is  unwarranted  class  legislation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ashbrook,  154  Mo.,  375. 

BARBERS  ACT. 

(Chapter  78,  K.  S.  1899.) 

Said  act  is  constitutional. 

Its  constitutionality  may  be  contested  by  habeas  corpus. 

It  is  a  police  regulation. 

It  is  not  special  legislation  since  it  applies. to  several  cities 
and  will  apply  to  others  as  they  attain  the  specified  population. 

Its  restrictions  of  the  Governor's  power  in  the  selection 
of  members  of  the  Board  of  Examiners  are  constitutional,  since 
the  Constitution  is  silent  as  to  how  such  appointments  shall  be 
made. 

The  refusal  of  the  unions  to  recommend  for  appointment, 
as  required,  would  not  have  the  effect  to  repeal  the  law. 

The  Constitution  does  not  control  the  disbursement  of 
the  fund  authorized  to  be  raised  by  said  act;  said  fund  is  not 
State  revenue. 

Exparte  Lucas,  160  Mo.,  218. 

BEER   INSPECTION. 
(Act  May  4,  1899.) 

Said  act  is  constitutional. 

It  is  not  a  revenue  measure  under  the  guise  of  inspection. 
The  right  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  is  not  a  natural  right. 
Under  the  police  power  the  State  may  prohibit  their  sale 
altogether. 


134  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs. 

The  State  may  authorize  their  sale  under  such  regulations 
as  it  deems  proper. 

The  amount  of  an  occupation  tax  may  he  fixed  in  propor- 
tion to  the  business  done. 

It  is  not  necessary  that  the  license  is  of  a  fixed  period, 
nor  that  a  fixed  amount  be  paid  for  a  fixed  time. 

The  legislative  power  is  limited  only  by  the  Constitution. 

One  statute  may  impose  a  tax  upon  the  privilege  of  car- 
rying on  a  business  and  another  statute  may  confer  the  privilege. 

Said  act  does  not  violate  the  right  of  interstate  commerce. 

The  fourteenth  amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution  does 
not  interfere  with  the  exclusive  right  of  a  state  to  make  all 
proper  police  regulations. 

vState  vs.  Bixman,  162  Mo.,  I. 
COLLATERAL  INHERITANCE  TAX. 
(Act  of  1899.) 

Said  act  constitutional. 

It  does  not  impose  a  tax  on  the  property.  It  is  a  duty 
levied  upon  the  right  or  privilege  of  receiving  the  same. 

The  right  to  inherit  is  not  a  natural  right.  Terms  may 
be  prescribed  upon  which  collateral  kindred  may  take  the  prop- 
erty of  a  decedent. 

Conveyances,  devised,  etc.,  to  charitable  purposes  may  be 
exempted  from  its  burdens. 

It  is  not  required  by  the  Constitution  that  all  revenues 
first  go  into  one  general  fund. 

The  Constitution  only  requires  that  appropriations  be  made 
in  the  order  therein  designated. 

No  special  lien  or  priority  of  payment  of  one  appropria- 
tion over  another  is  given  by  the  Constitution. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Henderson,  160  Mo.,  190. 

COLLATERAL    SUCCESSION    TAX. 

(Act  of  April  1,  1895,  and  amendatory  Acts  of  March  16  and  17, 

1897.) 

Said  acts  are  constitutional. 

Said  act  levied  a  tax  within  the  meaning  of  article  10 
of  the  Constitution. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  135 

Taxes  can  be  levied  only  for  the  public  purpose. 

The  State  of  Missouri  may  authorize  and  levy  taxes  upon 
the  devolution  or  succession  of  property  for  public  purposes. 

A  tax  levied  by  said  act  is  not  for  the  public  purpose, 
but  for  the  benefit  of  certain  favored  individuals. 

A  collateral  inheritance  tax  levied  to  support  the  State 
University  would  not  be  for  a  public  purpose  and  is  unconsti- 
tutional. 

The  acts  in  question  provide  for  the  gift  of  public  money 
by  the  State  to  private  individuals  for  private  use. 

The  tax  provided  by  said  act  is  a  property  tax  and  not 
a  bonus  levied  upon  the  right  to  take  the  property. 

It  is  not  uniform  within  the  meanings  of  the  Constitution. 

Paternalism  is  pernicious  in  its  tendencies  and  taxation  can 
not  be  justified  in  its  name. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Switzler,  143  Mo.,  287. 

DEEDS  OF  TRUST  AND  MORTGAGES. 

The  amendment  adopted  at  the  general  election  in  Novem- 
ber, 1900,  adding  two  sections  to  article  10  of  the  Constitution 
of  Missouri,  in  reference  to  the  taxation  of  land,  deeds  of  trust 
and  mortgages,  is  a  violation  of  the  14th  amendment  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

Russell  vs.  Croy,  164  Mo.,  69. 

DOUBLE  TAXATION. 

Taxing  shares  against  the  stockholders  and  also  the  prop- 
erty represented  by  the  capital  stock  of  the  corporation  would 
be  duplicate  taxation. 

State  vs.  Railroad,  77  Mo.,  202. 

In  levying  taxes  on  property,  it  sometimes  cannot  be 
avoided  that  the  same  value  will  be  twice  taxed;  but  this  does 
not  make  the  tax  levied  illegal  as  double  taxation. 

Life  Insurance  Co.  vs.  Board  of  Assessors,  56  Mo., 
5°3- 


136  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Taxation  by  a  city  of  the  second  class  both  by  -way  of  license 
and  a  tax  on  the  net  income  of  foreign  insurance  companies  is 
not  double  taxation. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.  Ernst,  95  Mo.,  360. 

A  provision  that  the  payment  of  certain  fees  by  life  insur- 
ance companies  shall  be  in  lieu  of  all  fees  and  taxes  whatever, 
except  that  they  may  be  taxed  upon  their  paid  up  capital  stock 
the  same  as  other  property  for  county  and  municipal  purposes, 
does  not  prevent  the  taxation  of  other  property  owned  by  com- 
panies over  and  above  the  par  value  of  their  capital  stock,  and 
such  taxation  is  not  double,  but  the  non-taxation  of  such  property 
would  amount  to  an  exemption  in  violation  of  the  State  Consti- 
tution. 

Life  Ass'n.  vs.  Board  of  Assessors,  49  Mo.,  512. 

DUE  PROCESS  OF  LAW. 

A  statute  attempting  to  legalize  the  sale  of  land  for  taxes 
without  notice  to  the  owner  is  void. 

Roth  vs.  Gabbart,  123  Mo.,  21. 

A  tax-bill  issued  under  the  Laws  of  1883,  p.  343,  to  the 
sheriff  of  the  county  to  which  a  person  owing  personal  taxes  has 
removed  is  "due  process  of  law"  within  the  meaning  of  the 
Constitution. 

De  Arman  vs.  Williams.  93  Mo.,  158. 

Property  sold  for  taxes  in  valid  exercise  of  the  taxing  power 
cannot  be  said  to  be  taken  from  the  owner  without  due  process 
of  law. 

If  any  steps  in  the  exercise  of  the  power  to  tax  are  so  in- 
dispensable that  without  them  no  tax  can  be  raised,  then  the 
owner  cannot  by  legislation  be  declared  excluded  from  showing 
the  truth. 

Abbott  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.,  166. 

The  General  Assembly  may  authorize  boards  of  equaliza- 
tion by  way  of  penalty  to  treble  the  taxes  of  one  who  with  intent 
to  defraud  has  given  in  a  false  list  of  his  property  for  taxation. 

Where  the  law  provides  for  a  hearing  for  such  persons 
before  the  Board  of  Equalization,  he  is  not  deprived  of  the  right 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  137 

of  trial  by  jury  nor  is  his  property  taken  without  due  process 
of  law. 

State  ex  rel.  Ferguson  vs.  Moss,  69  Mo.,  495. 

FOREIGN  CORPORATIONS. 

The  tangible  property  of  a  foreign  corporation,  although 
it  derives  its  charter  from  an  act  of  Congress  and  is  a  govern- 
mental agent  and  an  instrument  of  interstate  commerce,  is  sub- 
ject to  taxation  in  this  State. 

The  franchise  of  foreign  corporations  doing  business  under 
the  laws  of  this  State  is  property  and  is  subject  to  taxation 
either  directly  in  the  proportion  that  the  proportion  of  the  fran- 
chise exercises  in  this  State  bears  to  the  proportion  of  the  fran- 
chise exercised  in  all  states;  or,  indirectly  by  being  imposed 
upon  the  tangible  property  owned  by  it  in  Missouri  and  by  con- 
sidering the  franchise  and  its  tangible  property  as  a  system  and 
then  assessing  the  part  of  the  property  forming  a  part  of  the 
system  located  in  this  State  as  of  its  proportionate  value  of  the 
whole  property  constitutes  the  system. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Union  Tel.  Co.,  165  Mo.,  502. 

INCOME  TAX. 

The  income  tax  bill,  Act  of  February,  1865,  was  constitu- 
tional. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

INTOXICATING  LIQUORS. 

The  State  has  a  right  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  without  a  license  therefor. 

State  ex  rel.  Troll  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 
Ausmus  vs.  State,  10  Mo,,  591. 
State  vs.  Lemp,   16  Mo.,  389. 
State  vs.  Sercy,  20  Mo.,  489. 
State  vs.  "Rixman,   162  Mo.   I. 

INTERSTATE  COMMERCE. 

No  state  can  prohibit  the  introduction  of  foreign  merchan- 
dise, if  Congress  has  authorized  its  introduction,  but  each  state 
may  regulate  her  internal  traffic  according  to  her  own  pleasure. 


138  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Each  state  can  act  upon  an  article  of  commerce  after  it 
has  passed  from  foreign  commerce,  and  becomes  a  part  of  the 
property  of  its  citizens. 

Crow,  et  al  vs.  State,  14  Mo.,  237. 

A  tax  ievied  by  a  state  authority  upon  the  gross  receipts 
of  an  express  company  whose  business  consists  in  receiving- 
goods  to  be  delivered  outside  of  the  state  is  not  in  conflict  with 
that  provision  of  the  Constitution  which  confines  to  Congress 
alone  the  power  to  regulate  commerce  between  the  several 
states. 

Express  Co.  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  66  Mo.,  675. 

LAWYERS  AND  PHYSICIANS. 

Lawyers  and  physicians  may  be  compelled  to  pay  a  license 
for  practicing  their  professions. 

The  license  fees  which  are  imposed  upon  those  who  pursue 
particular,  employments  are  taxes. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 
St.  Louis  vs.  Sternberg,  4  App.,  453. 
See  also  No.  13,  Sec.  i,  supra. 

PERSONAL  JUDGMENT. 

(Act  of  1877.) 

The  Act  of  1877  providing  for  the  enforcement  of  a  tax  lien 
against  land  without  a  personal  judgment  against  the  owner 
is  constitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  Rosenblatt  vs.  Sargent,  76  Mo.,  557. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bridge  Co.,  73  Mo.,  442. 

Said  act  is  not  unconstitutional  as  being  retrospective. 

Wellschear  vs.  Kelley,  69  Mo.,  343. 

POLICE  FORCE. 

The  State  has  authority  to  create  a  police  force  for  a  city 
and  compel  the  city  to  maintain  it. 

The  State  in  such  cases,  by  the  act  creating  the  force,  and 
prescribing  their  pay  and  directing  the  city  to  pay  it,  levies  the 
tax  and  directs  the  city  how  to  apply  it. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  139 

The  city  does  not  levy  it,  and  cannot  say  she  has  assumed 
obligations  which  are  superior  to  charges  imposed  upon  her 
revenue  by  the  State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mason,  153  Mo.,  23. 

REFUNDING  TAXES. 

Taxes  illegally  collected  by  a  township  from  a  railroad  un- 
der an  unconstitutional  law  were  properly  paid  into  the  State 
treasury. 

The  Act  of  the  General  Assembly  of  March  19, 1881,  provid- 
ing for  the  refunding  of  such  taxes  to  the  townships  by  the  State 
is  unconstitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  41. 

ROAD  TAXES. 

Eoad  taxes  are  county  taxes  within  the  meaning  of  section 
11,  article  10  of  the  Constitution  and  cannot  be  levied  in  excess 
of  its  limitation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  145  Mo.,  596. 

STREET  RAILWAYS. 

(Act  of  1897.) 
Said  act  held  constitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Street  Railroad,  161  Mo.,  188. 

CONSTITUTION  OF  1865. 

Section  16,  article  11  of  the  Constitution  of  1865  did  not 
withdraw  the  existing  exemptions  from  taxation  granted  by  the 

Legislature. 

Barry  vs.  Cemetery  Ass'n,  10  App.,  587. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wesleyan  Cemetery  Ass'n,  n  App., 

570- 

A  provision  in  the  statutes  of  1865  allowing  tax-payers  who 
had  subscribed  to  the  capital  stock  of  a  railroad  company  credit 
on  their  taxes  in  proportion  to  the  amounts  of  their  subscrip- 
tions was  repugnant  to  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  of  1865 

and  invalid. 

Cock  vs.  Stewart,  85  Mo.,  575. 


140  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

ACT  OF  MARCH   18,  1870. 

The  Act  of  March  18,  1870,  in  relation  to  the  assessment  of 
revenues  on  real  estate  providing  the  tax  on  real  estate  shall  be 
a  lien  thereon,  and  providing  for  the  sale  and  enforcement  of 
such  lien  is  constitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Draper,  47  Mo.,  29. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Magiiire,  47  Mo.,  35. 


COUNTY  CLERKS. 

1.  Under  the  Act  of  1877,  a  statement  of  the  county  clerk 
is  not  void,  because  of  a  mistake  in  the  year  the  tax  is  desig- 
nated delinquent,  where  it  appears  that  the  tax  is  properly  levied. 

Morrison  vs.  Railroad  Company,  96  Mo.,  602. 

2.  A  county  clerk  in  the  absence  of  an  order  of  the  county 
court  levying  a  tax,  is  without  authority  to  extend  the  taxes. 

Railroad  Company  vs.  Apperson,  97  Mo.,  300. 

3.  An  extension  of  the  taxes  of  the  county  clerk's  copy,  in- 
stead of  the  original  assessor's  book,  does  not  invalidate  the 
tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Lounsberry,  125  Mo.,  157. 

4.  A  county  clerk  is  not  entitled  to  fees  under  section  5600, 
K.  S.  1879,  for  filing  the  assessment  lists  of  taxable  property. 

Nor  are  these  allowed  for  such  filing  by  the  provisions  of 
the  General  Eevenue  Law,  section  6862,  E.  S.  1879. 

Hubbard  vs.  Texas  County,  101  Mo.,  210. 

5.  Under  the  Act  of  1867,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  county  clerk 
'to  extend  the  amount  of  the  school  taxes  on  the  assessment 
books. 

Brown  vs.  Harris,  52  Mo.,  306. 

6.  Mandamus  will  lie  to  compel  a  county  clerk  to  extend  a 
school  tax  upon  the  tax  books,  according  to  the  estimate  fur- 
nished him  by  the  district  directors ;  and  this,  notwithstanding 
the  extension  has  been  prohibited  by  an  order  of  the  county 
court. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  141 

The  county  court  has.  no  control  over  the  county  clerk  in  re- 
spect to  the  extension  of  school  taxes. 

School  District  vs.  Byers,  67  Mo.,  706. 

7.  Where  in  counties  having  adopted  an  organization  law, 
the  county  clerk  makes  out  duplicate  tax-bills  or  vouchers  for 
the  use  of  the  township  collector,  the  State  can  be  held  for  any 
proportion  of  the  fees  specified  under  section  245,  W.  S.,  1872, 
for  services  so  rendered. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Auditor,  61  Mo.,  524. 

8.  The  failure  of  the  county  clerk  to  sign  and  seal  the  as- 
sessor's book  as  required  by  section  6723,  E.  S.  1879,  renders  it 
of  no  official  validity  and  affords  the  collector  no  authority  to 
enforce  the  collection  of  the  taxes  contained  therein. 

Railway  Company  vs.  Apperson,  97  Mo.,  300. 

9.  A  woman  is  not  disqualified,  because  of  her  sex,  from  the 
office  of  county  clerk  in  Missouri. 

The  office  of  clerk  of  a  court  is  ministerial  and  its  duties 
may  be  performed  by  a  woman. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hostetter,  137  Mo.,  636. 

10.  No  authority  is  conferred  on  a  county  clerk  to  assess 
property  for  school  or  other  taxes. 

He  is  required  to  assess  or  extend  the  amounts  of  revenue 
to  be  apportioned  and  raised  for  school  purposes. 

His  powers  are  limited  to  the  computation  and  apportion- 
ment upon  the  tax  assessor's  returns  as  made. 

School  District  vs.  Wickersham,  34  App.,  337. 


COUNTY  COURTS. 

1.  The  county  court  has  no  implied  power  to  levy  taxes. 
The  conditions  imposed  by  the  Legislature    upon    taxing 

power  must  be  observed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  the  Hannibal  and  St.  Joseph  Railroad 
Company,  87  Mo.,  236. 

2.  The  county  court  is  without  jurisdiction  to  act  upon  a 
void  delinquent  list. 

Howard  vs.  Heck,  88  Mo.,  456. 


142  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

3.  A  railroad  interest  fund  tax  can  be  levied  by  a  county 
court  without  strict  compliance  with  section  6799,  R.  S.  1879. 

Under  said  section,  an  order  issued  by  a  circuit  judge  in 
1882  gave  no  authority  to  the  county  court  to  re-levy  such  tax 
for  the  year  1880. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  97  Mo.,  296. 

4.  There  must  be  an  order  of  the  county  court  levying  taxes 

before  the  clerk  can  legally  extend  them. 

Railway  Company  vs.  Apperson,  97  Mo.,  300. 

5.  While  the  county  court,  for  the  purchase  of  a  site  for  a 
court  house,  may  anticipate  the  revenue  collected,  and  to  be 
collected,  it  cannot  bind  the  county  in  excess  of  the  annual  rev- 
enue. 

Sheidley  vs.  Lynch,  95  Mo.,  487. 

6.  Under  the  Laws  of  1872,  it  was  necessary  that  the  rec- 
ords of  the  county  court  show  that  the  court  had  examined  and 
corrected  the  "delinquent  list." 

And,  further,  that  the  court  directed  the  corrected  list  to  be 
certified  and  filed. 

State  ex. rel.  vs.  Scott,  96  Mo.,  72. 

7.  County  courts  are  simply  trustees  of  the  school  fund. 
In  the  control  and  management  of  said  fund  they  must  strict- 
ly conform  to  the  statutory  requirements. 

Montgomery  County  vs.  Auchley,  103  Mo.,  492. 

8.  Under  E.  S.  1879,  section  5405,  the  county  court  may  fix 
the  salary  of  the  county  treasurer. 

Givens  vs.  Daviess  County,  107  Mo.,  603. 

9.  Levy  by  the  county  court  to  pay  railroad  township 
taxes  gives  rise  to  the  presumption  that  the  preliminary  order 
required  to  be  made  by  the  circuit  court,  under  the  Act  of  March 
8,  1879,  has  been  complied  with. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  101  Mo.,  136. 

10.  A  nunc  pro  tune  order  of  the  county  court,  in  reference 
to  taxation,  will  be  presumed  to  have  been  made  upon  sufficient 
evidence. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Vaile,  122  Mo.,  33. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laurs.  143 

11.  The  levy  of  a  tax  to  pay  a  judgment  against  a  county 
will  be  void  where  the  court  did  not  comply  with  the  require- 
ments of  section  6799,  R.  S.  1879. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hager,  91  Mo.,  452. 

12.  An  order  of  the  county  court,  fixing  the  right  of  taxa- 
tion and  making  the  levy,  is  sufficient,  if  it  is  in  substantial  com- 
pliance with  the  statute. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Kansas  City,  116  Mo.,  15. 

13.  The  judges  of  the  county  court  will  be  held  accountable 
to  the  county  as  trustees  for  the  diversion  of  the  county  school 

fund  even  though  done  by  mistake. 

Where  the  county  receives  the  benefit  of  the  money  misap- 
plied, it  should  refund  to  the  judges,  from  the  general  revenues, 
such  sum  as  they  have  been  obliged  to  pay  in  restoring  the  mis- 
applied funds. 

Knox  County  vs.  Hunolt,  no  Mo.,  67. 

14.  In  a  suit  for  taxes  based  on  a  new  levy,  credit  should  be 
allowed  for  taxes  paid  on  a  prior  illegal  levy. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railway  Company,  92  Mo.,  137. 

15.  In  the  absence  of  the  certificate  from  the  counties,  of 
cities  where  railroad  property  is  situate,  showing  the  rate  of  tax- 
ation levied  by  the  city  on  all  property  for  city  purposes,  the 
county  court  cannot  levy  the  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company  135  Mo.,  77. 

16.  The  county  court  will  not  be  compelled  by  mandamus 
to  issue  a  warrant  on  the  common  fund  of  the  county  for  the  pay- 
ment of  railroad  bond  indebtedness  when  the  result  would  be 
to  withdraw  from  the  treasury  all  the  funds  necessary  for  the 
support  of  the  county  government. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Macon  County  Court,  68  Mo.,  29. 

17.  While  the  county  is  ordinarily  not  liable  for  a  general 
debt  upon  a  warrant  drawn  against  a  special  fund,  yet,  if  it  di- 
verts the  money  of  that  fund  from  the  payment  of  the  warrant 
and  assesses  for  other  purposes,  it  becomes  liable. 

Valleau  vs.  Newton  County  Court,  72  Mo.,  593. 


144  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

18.  County  courts  are  expressly  authorized  to  hold  as  many 
adjourned  terms  as  they  deem  necessary  at  any  time,  provided 
the  period  fixed  for  the  adjourned  session  does  not  overrun  the 
next  regular  term. 

All  business  done  at  such  adjourned  session  is  considered 
as  done  at  the  same  term. 

Higgins  vs.  Ransdall,  13  Mo.,  144. 

19.  County  courts  have  no  power  to  alter  the  assessment 
of  taxes  to  build  schoolhouses,  merely  on  the  alleged  ground  that 
the  schoolhouse  is  unnecessary;  the  decision  of  that  question  is 
left  to  the  local  directors. 

Petition  of  Powers,  Kilcullen,  et  al.,  52  Mo..  218. 

20.  Where  an  injunction  suit  is  brought  on  behalf  of  the 
county  against  a  purchaser  of  school  land  to  stay  waste  and  the 
members  of  the  county  court  executed  the  injunction  bond,  they 
will  be  entitled  to  reimbursement  out  of  the  purchase  money 
when  paid  by  the  vendee  of  the  land  into  the  township  fund  for 
any  sum  which  may  have  been  recovered  from  them  on  this  bond, 
on  dissolution  of  the  injunction. 

In  bringing  such  suit,  and  executing  such  bond,  the  members 
of  the  county  court  act  as  ministerial  agents  of  the  State  for  the 
benefit  of  the  township. 

Washington  County  vs.  Boyd,  64  Mo.,  179. 

21.  A  contract  with  a  county  court  cannot  be  established 
by  parol  evidence;  it  is  a  court  of  records  and  can  only  speak 
by  its  records. 

A  verbal  contract  by  a  county  court  is  not  validated  by  the 
fact  that  the  county  court  has  paid  part  of  the  money  stipulated 
to  be  paid  and  the  work  was  afterwards  completed  and  was 
accepted  and  used  by  the  county. 

It  is  not  the  province  of  the  county  court  to  provide  a  docket 
for  the  circuit  court  or  to  contract  for  entering  upon  such  docket 
satisfaction  of  the  judgments  rendered  in  the  latter  court. 
Maupin  vs.  Franklin  County,  67  Mo.,  327. 

22.  Where  there  is  danger  that  a  real  estate  mortgage  to 
a  county  to  secure  the  loan  of  school  funds  may  decrease  in  value, 
it  is  the  duty  of  the  county  court,  if  deemed  advisable,  to  demand 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  145 

Additional  security,  and,  in  case  of  failure  to  furnish  the  same, 
to  order  an  immediate  sale  of  the  property. 

In  the  employment  of  agents,  counties  have  not  even  the 
power  conferred  on  ordinary  corporations. 

They  act  in  subordination  to  and  as  auxiliary  to  the  State 
government. 

Ray  County  vs.  Bentley,  49  Mo.,  236. 

23.  The  county  court  is  the  trustee  for  the  care  and  man- 
agement of  the  township  school  funds. 

In  this  capacity  it  may,  under  certain  circumstances,  pay 
out  money  for  which  the  township  is  manifestly  liable,  in  order  to 
avoid  the  expense  of  litigation,  but  if  it  err  in  so  doing,  the  case 
is  one  of  misappropriation  by  a  trustee,  for  which  the  law  has 
provided  sufficient  remedies  other  than  mandamus. 

The  county  court  is  also  agent  or  trustee  of  the  State  for 
certain  purposes  in  the  general  affairs  of  the  county. 

Township   Board  of  Education  vs.   Boyd,   58  Mo., 
276. 

24.  County  courts  have  power  to   compromise   disputed 
claims  for  taxes. 

Railway  Company  vs.  Anthony,  73  Mo.,  431. 

25.  County  courts,  when  acting  in  a  judicial  capacity,  can 
speak  only  through  and  by  their  records. 

A  county  court  cannot  bind  a  party  with  whom  it  professes 
to  contract  by  simply  reciting  the  alleged  contract  on  its  records. 
The  assent  of  the  contracting  parties  must  appear. 

Riley  vs.  Pettis  County,  96  Mo.,  318. 

26.  A  county  court  in  making  a  settlement  with  the  county 
treasurer,  under  section  6378,  E.  S.  1879,  does  not  act  in  a  ju- 
dicial capacity. 

Cole  County  vs.  Dallmeyer,  101  Mo.,  57. 

27.  A  levy  by  the  county  court  to  pay  a  railroad  township 
tax  gives  rise  to  the  presumption,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to 
the  contrary,  that  the  preliminary  order  required  to  be  made  by 
the  circuit  court,  under  the  Act  of  March  8,  1879,  has  been  com- 
plied with. 

D— 10 


146  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Where  the  county  court  opens  a  regular  term  and  adjourns 
from  day  to  day  for  a  number  of  days,  the  adjournments  are  a 
part  of  the  regular  term  and  taxes  may  be  levied  at  such  ad- 
journed term. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railway  Company,  101  Mo.,  137. 

28.  A  material  alteration  on  a  county  collector's  bond, 
made  by  either  the  clerk  of  the  court  or  by  the  collector  in  the 
presence  of  some  of  the  judges,  releases  the  sureties. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Findley,  101  Mo.,  368. 

29.  The  county  court  may  make  transfers  to  the  county 
contingency  fund  from  any  surplus  remaining  in  the  other  funds 
provided  for  in  section  7663,  E.  S.  1889,  and  can  after  such  trans- 
fers are  made,  pay  proper  demands  on  such  contingency  fund. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Appleby,  136  Mo.,  408. 

30.  A  county  is  not  bound  by  the  approval  by  the  county 
court  of  a  report  of  the  county  clerk  reciting  the  fees  he  has  re- 
ceived, except  as  to  such  fees  as  are  mentioned  in  the  report. 

Callaway  County  vs.  Henderson,  139  Mo.,  510. 

31.  There  is  no  appeal  to  the  circuit  court  from  the  action 
of  the  county  court  in  auditing  the  accounts  of  the  circuit  clerk 
and  making  an  order  on  him  directing  him  to  pay  into  the  county 
treasury  the  ascertained  balance  due  from  him  to  the  county. 

There  is  no  appeal  to  the  circuit  court  from  the  county  court 
from  an  order  touching  issues  and  matters  which  circuit  courts 
cannot  try  and  determine  anew. 

County  courts  have  full  power  to  settle  with  circuit  clerks 
after  the  expiration  of  their  terms  of  office. 

Scott  County  vs.  Leftwich,  145  Mo.,  26. 

32.  County  courts  have  power  to  employ  attorneys  to  rep- 
resent the  county  in  suits  brought  against  it. 

Reynolds  vs.  Clark  County,  162  Mo.,  680. 

33.  The  statute  does  not  require  the  order  of  the  county 
court,  requesting  the  prosecuting  attorney  to  present  a  petition 
to  the  circuit  judge  for  permission  to  levy  taxes  in  excess  of 
those  required  for  State,  county,  school  and  other  current  pur- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  147 

poses,  to  specify  the  taxes  that  are  to  be  included  in  the  order 
of  the  circuit  court. 

It  is  sufficient  if  the  order  shows  that  the  county  court  was 
satisfied  that  there  was  a  necessity  for  the  assessment  and  levy 
of  other  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  165  Mo.,  597. 

34.  Where  the  justices  of  a  county  court  have  refused  to 
cause  a  warrant  to  be  drawn  to  pay  a  bill  of  costs  taxed  against 
the  county,  mandamus  is  a  proper  proceeding  to  compel  the  is- 
suance of  such  warrant. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.   Fraker,   166  Mo.,   130. 


CURATOR. 

1.  Under  the  statutes  of  Missouri,  a  curator  has  the  pos- 
session of  the  estate  of  his  ward,  both  real  and  personal. 

It  is  his  duty  to  list  such  property  to  the  assessor. 

If  listed  by  and  assessed  to  the  curator,  he  should  pay  the 
taxes  out  of  the  money  in  his  hands  as  curator. 

The  curator  must  list  the  property  and  the  assessor  should 
assess  it  against  him. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bnrr,  143  Mo.,  209. 

2.  The  personal  property  in  the  hands  of  a  curator  became 
liable  for  taxes  on  the  first  of  January. 

The  February  following,  the  curator  turned  over  the  prop- 
erty to  his  ward  and  was  discharged  on  settlement. 

Held,  he  should  have  given  in  the  property  for  assessment 
and  on  settlement  retained  sufficient  to  pay  the  taxes. 

Failing  to  do  this,  he  was  personally  liable  for  the  assess- 
ment made  by  the  assessor. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Simpson,  90  App.,  50. 
(See  situs). 


148  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 


COUNTY  TREASURER. 

1.  County  courts,  in  making  stated  settlement  with  county 
treasurers,  do  not  act  in  a  judicial  capacity. 

Sections  5380-5383,  E.  S.  1879,  do  not  authorize  a  judgment 
against  the  personal  representative  of  a  deceased  officer. 

The  demand  of  a  county  against  the  delinquent  officer  may 
be  established  by  the  judgment  of  the  circuit  court,  or,  if  he  be 
dead,  then  by  that  of  the  circuit  or  probate  court. 

Cole  County  vs.  Dallmeyer,  101  Mo.,  57. 

2.  A  county  treasurer  may  maintain  a  suit  against  a  county 

for  his  salary  without  first  presenting  his  claim  for  allowance 
under  E.  S.  1879,  section  5388. 

The  right  of  a  public  officer  to  a  salary  cannot  be  created  by 
a  contract. 

It  can  only  exist  as  a  creation  of  law. 

In  the  absence  of  constitutional  restriction,  the  salary  of  a 
public  officer  may  be  increased  or  diminished  during  the  term  of 
office. 

The  manner  of  payment  may  be  changed,  or  the  duties  en- 
larged, without  impairment  of  any  vested  right. 

Under  section  5405,  E.  S.  1879,  the  county  court  may  fix  the 
salary  of  the  county  treasurer. 

And  the  salary  so  fixed  could  not  be  changed  without  notice 
to  officers. 

Givens  vs.  Daviess  County,  107  Mo.,  603. 

3.  A  bond  of  a  county  treasurer  executed  to  the  State  in- 
stead of  the  county,  as  required  by  statute,  is  a  good  common 
law  bond. 

State  vs.  Thomas,  17  Mo.,  503. 

4.  The  additional  sections  23,  24  and  25,  p.  1306,  W.  S., 
make  it  the  duty  of  the  county  court  to  require  of  a  county  treas- 
urer, when  his  official  bond  becomes  insufficient,  a  single  bond  in 
the  sum  of  not  less  than  twenty  thousand  dollars. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  149 

The  acceptance  of  several  bonds  aggregating  that  sum  is  not 
a  compliance  with  the  law  and  will  not  have  the  effect  of  releas- 
ing the  sureties  on  the  old  bond. 

Such  obligation  will,  however,  be  good  as  voluntary  bonds, 
and  the  sureties  in  that  will  be  liable. 

An  additional  bond  required  by  the  statute,  does  not  secure 
the  county  merely  against  defalcation  in  excess  of  the  amount 
of  his  original  bond ;  but  against  any  that  may  accrue. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Sappington,  67  Mo.,  529. 

5.  A  county  treasurer  who  pays  a  warrant  when  there  is  no 
money  in  the  fund  upon  which  it  is  drawn,  cannot  recover  the 
amount  from  the  county  even  though  payment  was  made  at  the 
instance  of  the  county  court  and  upon  their  promise  to  make  good 
the  amount. 

Cook  vs.  Putnam  County,  70  Mo.,  668. 

6.  Where  a  county  treasurer  pays  a  warrant  not  yet  pay- 
able, an  action  win  lie  on  his  part  for  the  recovery  of  the  money 
so  disbursed. 

Morrow  vs.  Surber,  97  Mo.,  155. 

7.  The  separate  bond  required  by  section  42,  p.  1251,  W.  S., 
to  be  given  by  the  county  treasurer  as  custodian  of  the  school 
money,  need  not  specify  those  moneys  in  an  action  against  a 
county  treasurer,  on  a  school  fund  to  recover  moneys  not  ac- 
counted for.     He  is  not  entitled  to  credit  for  sums  paid  on  war- 
rants of  county  clerks,  or  the  clerk  of  any  township,  in  excess 
of  the  amount  received  by  him  from  that  township. 

State  ex  reL  vs.  Cook,  72  Mo.,  496. 

8.  The  sureties  on  the  general  bond  of  the  county  treas- 
urer are  not  liable  for  his  failure  to  account  for  and  pay  over  to 
his  successor  in  office,  county  and  township  school  funds. 

For  the  special  duties  imposed  upon  him  by  the  school  law, 
he  is  answerable  on  a  separate  bond. 

State  vs.  Johnson,  55  Mo.,  80. 

9.  Loss  of  funds  of  the  county  through  failure  of  the  bank 
in   which    they    were  .  deposited,    will    not   relieve   the    treas- 
urer from  liability  to  account  for  them;  and  this  is  true,  although 
before  selecting  that  bank  as  the  repository,  he  made  strict  in- 


150  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lai^s. 

quiry  as  to  its  safety  and  solvency,  and  the  lawless  condition  of 
the  county  made  it  impossible  to  keep  the  funds  safely  elsewhere 
than  in  a  bank. 

If  a  county  treasurer  makes  a  general  deposit  of  a  county's 
funds  in  a  bank  to  his  credit  as  treasurer,  the  bank  becomes  in- 
debted to  him  in  his  official  capacity,  and  he  takes  the  risk  of  be- 
ing able  to  collect  the  funds. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Moore,  74  Mo.,  413. 

10.  The  fact  that  the  treasurer  had  for  years  deposited  the 
county's  money  in  a  certain  bank,  and  that  the  county  knew  this 
fact,  does  not  estop  the  county  to  deny  the  treasurer 's  authority 
to  make  the  money  realized  from  the  sale  of  the  county  bonds 
a  part  of  the  trespasser's  general  deposit,  or  to  deny  his  au- 
thority in  any  wise  to  direct  it  from  the  purpose  to  which  it 
was  created. 

Butler  County  vs.  Bank,  143  Mo.,  13, 

11.  Judges  of  the  county  courts,  made  trustees  of  a  fund  be- 
queathed for  the  education  of  poor  young  men  and  women  in  the 
county,  have  a  right  to  employ  an  agent  to  handle  it,  and  if  the 
experience,  talents,  reputation  and  financial  standing    of    the 
county  treasurer  suggests  that  he  is  a  proper  person  to  receive 
the  custody  and  management  of  it,  they  may  make  him  their 
agent,  and  having  done  so,  they  are  not  responsible  for  the  loss 
or  inappropriation  of  the  fund  by  him. 

The  treasurer's  bond,  however,  is  broad  enough  to  embrace 
trust  funds  so  committed  to  him. 

Anderson  vs.  Roberts,  147  Mo.,  486. 


COUNTY  WARRANTS. 

1.  The  ten  years  statute  of  limitations  applies  to  county 
warrants. 

Valleau  vs.  Newton  County,  81  Mo.,  591. 

2.  Actions  on  county  warrants  are  governed  by  the  special 
statute  of  limitations,  section  3195,  R.  S.  1889,  and  not  by  the 
general  statute  of  limitations. 

Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  151 

3.  A  county  warrant,  drawn  on  the  general  county  fund  for 
one  year,  may  be  paid  out  of  the  general  fund  of  a  subsequent 
year. 

Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387. 

4.  The  statute  of  1845,  prescribing  the  form  of  county  war- 
rants, is  merely  directory. 

Young  vs.  Camden  County,  19  Mo.,  309. 

5.  A  county  warrant  will  not  draw  interest  before  pre- 
sentment to  the  treasurer  and  refusal   of  payment. 

Robbins  vs.  Lincoln  County  Court,  3  Mo.,  57. 
Skinner  vs.  Platte  County,  22  Mo.,  437. 

6.  The  holder  of  a  warrant,  payable  out  of  a  particular 
fund,  can  look  only  to  that  fund  for  the  payment  of  his  claim. 

Kingsberry  vs.  Pettis  County,  48  Mo.,  207. 
Pettis  County  vs.  Kingsbury,  17  Mo.,  479. 

7.  A  county  court  is  not  liable  generally  upon  a  warrant 
drawn  upon  a  fund  which  has  become  exhausted  and  which  the 
county  court  has  no  power  to  replenish. 

Moody  vs.  Cass  County,  74  Mo.,  307. 

8.  The  holder  of  a  county  warrant  payable  out  of  a  special 
fund  cannot  recover  thereon  from  the  county,  when  it  appears 
that  the  fund  has  been  exhausted. 

Campbell  vs.  Polk  County,  49  Mo.,  214. 
Campbell  vs.  Polk  County,  76  Mo.,  57. 

9.  If  a  special  fund  becomes  exhausted  by  the  payment  of 
demands  not  properly  charagable  to  it,  a  warrant  thereon  may 
be  enforced  against  the  general  fund. 

Valleau  vs.  Newton  County,  81  Mo.,  591. 
Valleau  vs.  Newton  County,  72  Mo.,  593. 

10.  A  county  warrant  drawn  on  a  fund  created  by  a  special 
act,  must  be  presented  for  payment  and  registry,  under  the 
general  revenue  law. 

Morrow  vs.  Surber,  97  Mo.,  155. 

11.  Warrants  issued  for  the  payment  of  the  ordinary  and 
usual  expenses  of  the  county,  must  be  paid  in  the  order  in 
which  they  are  presented  and  registered. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Allison,  155  Mo.,  325. 


152  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs. 

12.  A  county  court  lias  no  authority  to  issue  a  county  war- 
rant for  money  expended  by  the  sureties  of  a  defaulting  and  ab- 
sconding county  treasurer,  in  apprehending  such  treasurer  and 
bringing  him  back,  if  it  appears  that  the  sureties  were  able  to 
meet  the  deficit  of  such  treasurer. 

Hooper  vs.  Ely,  46  Mo.,  505. 

13.  A  county  warrant  payable  out  of  any  money  in  the 
treasury,  appropriated  for  county  expenditures,  is  a  written  ac- 
knowledgment of  indebtedness  by  the  county,  and  if  not  paid 
when  presented,  may  be  sued  on  by  the  holder. 

Bank  vs.  Franklin  County,  65  Mo.,  105. 
(Overruling  Howell  vs.  Reynolds  County,  51   Mo., 
1540 

14.  The  debts  of  a  county  are  created  when  the  services  are 
rendered  for  it,  or  the  goods  sold  and  delivered  to  it,  and  not 
when  its  warants  are  issued. 

Warrants  issued  when  there  is  money  in  the  proper  fund 
for  their  payment  are  not  made  illegal  by  the  using  of  said  fund 
to  pay  warrants  subsequently  issued. 

Bank  vs.  Douglas  County,  146  Mo.,  42. 

15.  A  county  warrant  lawfully  issued  in  1889,  should  be 
received  by  the  collector  in  payment  of  county  taxes  for  !?!_']. 

R.  S.,  1889,  Sections  3205,  7604. 
Reynolds  vs.  Norman,  114  Mo.,  509. 
Logan  vs.  County  Court,  63  Mo.,  336. 
Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387. 

16.  A  warrant  lawfully  issued  in  payment  of  an  indebted- 
ness of  one  year,  may  be  paid  out  of  the  revenues  of  a  subsequent 
year. 

Reynolds  vs.  Norman,  114  Mo.,  509. 
Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387. 

17.  Unless  the  county  revenues  for  one  year  are  more  than 
sufficient  to  pay  its  curent  expenses,  the  revenues  for  such  year 
cannot  be  applied  to  the  payment  of  county  warrants  issued  in 
other  years.    Nor  can  a  county  collector  receive  a  county  war- 
rant issued  for  current  expenses  of  one  year,  in  payment  of  taxes 
for  another  year,  unless  the  revenues  for  the  year  in  which  the 


Digest  of  the  Rci'cunc  Laws.  153- 

warrant  is  presented  exceed  tine  current  county  expenses  for 
that  year. 

Andrew  County  vs.  Schell,  135  Mo.,  31. 
Railroad  vs.  Thornton,  152  Mo.,  570. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Payne,  151  Mo.,  663. 
(Overruling  Reynolds  vs.   Norman,   114  Mo.,   509; 

Logan  vs.  Barton  County  Court,  63  Mo.,  336 ; 

and  obiter  in  Wilson  vs.  Knox  Comity,  1.32  Mo... 

3870 

18.  A  payment  of  valid  county  warrants  for  past  indebted- 
ness, must  be  postponed  until  the  payment  of  all  warrants  drawn 
for  the  expenses  of  the  current  year,  or  a  special  levy  may  be 
made  for  the  payment  of  such  warrants. 

Section  7654,  R.  S.,  1889. 

Andrew  County  vs.  Schell,  135  Mo.,  31. 

19.  A  fund  raised  by  a  county  court,  by  an  additional  as- 
sessment, to  pay  a  past  indebtedness  upon  the  petition  of  the 
prosecuting  attorney,  is  not  controlled  by  the  statutes  relating 
to  the  payment  of  warrants  issued  to  pay  current  expenses. 

Such  funds  should  be  applied  pro  rata  to  all  past  indebted- 
ness. 

A  judgment  creditor  with  respect  to  said  funds  is  in  no  bet- 
ter position  that  the  holder  of  such  warrant. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hortsman,  149  Mo.,  290. 

20.  A  county  warrant,  valid  when  issued,  is  not  rendered 
invalid  because  the  revenue  provided  to  pay  it  is  not  collected 
during  the  year  for  which  it  was  issued. 

It  may  be  paid  out  of  the  surplus  revenue  of  subsequent 
years. 

Such  warrants  should  be  paid  out  of  such  surplus  in  the 
order  of  their  presentation  and  registration. 

They  are  not  payable  pro  tanto  if  there  is  not  sufficient  funds 
to  pay  them  all. 

When  a  surplus  is  applicable  to  the  payment  of  warrants 
it  is  the  duty  of  the  county  treasurer  to  pay  them  without  wait- 
ing for  an  order  of  the  county  court. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Johnson,  162  Mo.,  621. 
(Overruling  obiter  in  State  ex  rel.  vs.  Horstman,  149- 
Mo.,  290.) 


154  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 


DECEDENTS'  ESTATES. 

1.  Taxes  on  the  personal  estate  of  a  decedent,  where  they 
.accrue  before  or  after  his  death,  are  "demands"  within  the 
meaning  of  E.  S.  1879,  chapter  1,  article  9. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  administrator  to  pay  such  demands 
without  presentation  for  allowance. 

Such  demands  may  be  established  by  proceeding  in  the  cir- 
cuit court. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tittman,  103  Mo.,  553. 

2.  The  claims  of  the  State  for  taxes  are  payable  by  the  ad- 
ministrator without  presentation  of  the  demand  for  allowance. 

Taxes  imposed  upon  the  assets  of  an  estate  in  process  of 
administration  have  priority  to  other  demands  of  the  third  and 
lower  class. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tittman,  119  Mo.,  661. 

3.  In  the  absence  of  fraud  in  its  procurement,  a  final  set- 
tlement by  an  administrator  for  his  decedent 's  estate  cannot 
be  set  aside  in  equity  in  order  that  the  State  may  recover  its 
iaxes. 

State  ex  rel,  vs.  Shaw,  163  Mo.,  191. 

4.  An  administrator,  after  his  discharge  upon  a  final  set- 
ilement,  cannot  be  held  liable  in  his  representative  capacity  for 
taxes  assessed  against  his  decedent's  estate. 

Nor  can  suit  be  maintained  against  the  heirs  for  personal 
iaxes  for  the  reason  the  assessment  was  not  against  them. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Kenrick,  159  Mo.,  631. 

5.  Suits  for  delinquent  personal  taxes  due  on  the  estate 
of  deceased  persons  may  be  brought  in  the  circuit  court. 

State  ex  rel.  Edwards,  162  Mo.,  660. 

6.  The  same  principle  applies  to  an  administrator  who  vol- 
untarily pays  illegal  taxes  upon  the  estate  of  his  intestate,  as 
to  a  person  acting  for  himself.     Neither  can  maintain  action  to 
recover  back. 

Cristy's  Administrator  vs.  City  of  St.  'Louis,  20  Mo., 
143- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  155 


DEEDS. 

1.  A  tax  deed  does  not  relate  back  to  the  sale. 

Donohoe  vs.  Veal,  19  Mo.,  331. 

2.  A  tax  deed  must  contain  proper  recitals. 

State  vs.  Richardson,  21  Mo.,  420. 

3.  The  Legislature  may  make  a  tax  deed  prima  facie  evi- 
dence as  to  essential  matters;  but  it  cannot  make  the  deed  ooa- 
clusive  evidence  as  to  such  matters. 

Raley  vs.  Winn,  76  Mo.,  263. 
Roth  vs.  Gabbert,  123  Mo.,  21. 

4.  A  tax  deed  may  be  conclusive  evidence  as  to  matters 
which  are  merely  formal. 

Raley  vs.  Winn,  76  Mo.,  263. 

5.  A  tax  deed  cannot  be  defeated  by  showing  an  offer 
to  pay  the  taxes  before  the  advertisement  of  the  land  for  sale. 

Raley  vs.  Winn,  76  Mo.,  263. 

6.  Nor  can  a  tax  deed  be  defeated  by  showing  an  omission 
of  the  dollar  mark  ($)  in  the  amount  of  the  judgment  or  by 
showing  that  the  printer  failed  to  affix  his  oath  showing  due 
publication  of  notice,  nor  because  the  presiding  justice  adds 
to  his  signature  to  the  judgment  the  word  "president"  instead 
of  his  proper  official  designation. 

Raley  vs.  Winn,  76  Mo.,  263. 

7.  Under  the  laws  of  1865,  a  tax  deed  acknowledged  before 
any  other  officer  than  the  county  clerk,  was  void. 

Dunlap  vs.  Henry,  76  Mo.,  106. 

8.  A  tax  deed  under  the  Back  Tax  Act  of  1877  passes  only 
the  title  of  the  defendant  in  the  tax  suit. 

Watt  vs.  Donald,  80  Mo.,  195. 

9.  A  tax  deed  by  county  treasurer  as  ex-officio  collector, 
is  void,  in  the  absence  of  proof  of  the  adoption  by  the  courtly 
of  township  organization. 

Spurlock  vs.  Dougherty,  81  Mo.,  171. 


156  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs. 

10.  A  tax  deed  which  does  not  affirmatively  show  the 
proper  publication  of  notice  of  sale  is  void. 

Spurlock  vs.  Dougherty,  81  Mo.,  171. 

11.  The  description  of  the  land  in  a  tax  deed  must  conform 
to  that  in  the  anterior  proceedings. 

Lowe  vs.  Ekey,  82  Mo.,  286. 

12.  Where  the  Court  had  jurisdiction  to  enter  the  tax  judg- 
ment, the  tax 'deed  cannot  be  collaterally  attacked  by  showing 
that  a  single  judgment  was  entered  against  several  lots.     (Laws 
of  1877.) 

Brown  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  262. 

13.  A  latent  ambiguity  in  the  description  of  the  land  in 
a.  tax  proceeding  may  be  made  certain  by  oral  evidence. 

Brown  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  262. 

14.  The  form  of  the  deed  prescribed  by  statute  must  be 
strictly  adhered  to,  and  any  material  variation  thereform  is 
fatal  to  the  validity  of  the  deed. 

Hopkins  vs.  Scott,  86  Mo.,  144. 
Pierce  vs.  Titsworth,  87  Mo.,  635. 
Sullivan  vs.  Donald,  90  Mo.,  278. 

15.  The  tax  deed  must  contain  necessary  recitals  of  facts 
even  where  no  form  is  prescribed  by  statute. 

Guffey  vs.  O'Reilley,  88  Mo.,  418. 

16.  A  tax  deed  must  affirmatively  show  the  amount  of 
taxes,  interest  and  cost  due  upon  each  tract  of  land. 

GufTey  vs.  O'Reilley,  88  Mo.,  418. 

17.  The  statute  requires  a  recital  in  a  deed  of  the  date  on 
which  the  land  is  offered  for  sale,  but  does  not  require  a  recital 
of  the  adjournment  of  sales  from  day  to  day. 

2  W.  S.,  p.  1208,  Sec.  223. 
Hill  vs.  Atterbury,  88  Mo.,  1.14. 

18.  Under  the  laws  of  1872,  unless  the  deed  recites  the- 
date  of  issue  of  the  special  execution,  it  is  void. 

Duff  vs.  Neilson,  90  Mo.,  93. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs.  157 

1-9.  A  tax  deed  based  on  a  sale  of  land  for  the  taxes  of 
1874  is  held  void  where  no  new  assessment  book  was  returned 
verified. 

Pike  vs.  Martindale,  91  Mo.,  268. 

20.  In  the  absence  of  recitals  to  the  contrary,  it  will  be 
presumed  that  the  notice  required  by  section  44,  page  541,  G. 
S.  1865,  was  duly  posted. 

Evans  vs.  Robberson,  92  Mo.,  192. 

21.  A  tax  deed  purporting  to  convey  only  the  "right,  title 
and  interest  of  the  state"  in  the  lands  described  therein,  is 
void. 

Kepchen  vs.  Mullinix,  92  Mo.,  118. 

22.  "Where  in  a  tax  sale  the  proceedings  are  regular,  the 
deed  conveys  the  land  and  not  only  the  interest  of  the  owner 
therein. 

Allen  vs.  McCabe,  93  Mo.,  138. 

23.  Where  possession  has  been  held  under  a  tax  deed  that 
has  been  of  record  for  ten  years,  the  deed  is  admissible  in  evi- 
dence, though  not  properly  acknowledged. 

Hoge  vs.  Hubb,  94  Mo.,  439. 

24.  Under  the  laws  of  1875,   a  tax  deed  conveying  two 
tracts  of  land  is  invalid,  unless  it  shows  that  there  was  a  sepa- 
rate sale  of  each  tract  for  its  own  taxes. 

Allen  vs.  Buckley,  94  Mo.,  158. 

25.  A  tax  deed  made  under  the  revenue  laws  of  1872  may 
be  impeached  by  the  records  and  papers  of  the  county  court. 

Kenney  vs.  Forsythe,  96  Mo.,  414. 

26.  A  taxrdeed  cannot  be  collaterally  attacked  by  showing 
that  the  taxes  for  which  the  land  had  been  sold   had  been  paid 
prior  to  the  beginning  of  the  suit. 

Hill  vs.  Sherwood,  96  Mo.,  125. 

27.  Under  the  laws  of  1872,  a  tax  deed  is  void  unless  it 
contains  the  recitals  required  by  the  statutory  form. 

Bender  vs.  Dungin,  99  Mo.,  126. 


158  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

28.  Where  the  statutory  form  of  tax  deeds  calls  for  a  re- 
cital that  the  sale  was  publicly  made,  its  omission  from  the 
deed  is  fatal. 

[.^^  Birgham  vs.  Birmingham,  103  Mo.,  345. 

29.  The  form  of  the  deed  prescribed  by  the  statute  must 
be  substantially  followed.    Even  though  a  tax  deed  is  adjudged 
invalid,  the  purchaser  may  recover  the  purchase  money,  taxes 
paid  by  him,  interest  and  costs. 

Birgham  vs.  Birmingham,  103  Mo.,  345. 

30.  Where  a  statute  prescribes  a  form  for  a  tax  deed,  such 
form  must  be  strictly  followed  or  the  deed  will  be  void. 

Pitkin  vs.  Reibel,  104  Mo.,  505. 

31.  Unless  the  tax  deed  contains  proper  recitals  as  to  the 
assignments  of  the  certificate  of  purchase,  a  deed  to  the  assignee 
will  be  void. 

Pitkin  vs.  Reibel,  104  Mo.,  505. 

32.  The  fact  that  a  tax  deed  may  not  be  valid  as  to  the 
taxes  for  one  year,  does  not  render  it  valid  as  to  a  conveyance 
for  the  taxes  of  another  year. 

Bird  vs.  Sellers,  113  Mo.,  580. 

33.  A  tax  deed  describing  the  land  and  using  apt  words  of 
conveyance  constitutes  color  of  title. 

Wilson  vs.  Taylor,  119  Mo.,  626. 

34.  A  description  of  land  in  a  tax  deed  as  "two  acres  in 
the  northwest  quarter  of  section  six  (6),  township  forty-nine 
(49),  range  thirty- three  (33),  the  property  of  Hester  Lucas, " 
is  fatally  defective. 

Western  vs.  Flannagan,  120  Mo.,  61. 

35.  A  tax  deed  must  contain  recitals  showing  a  compliance 
with  the  law. 

Western  vs.  Flannagan,  120  Me.,  61. 

36.  A  tax  deed  under  the  law  of  1872,  void  on  its  face  and 
of  record  for  three  years,  will  bar  a  recovery  by  the  former 
owner  of  the  land. 

Bird  vs.  Sellers,  122  Mo.,  23. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laus.  159- 

37.  A  tax  deed  void  on  its  face  gives  color  of  title. 

Pharis  vs.  Bayless,  122  Mo.,  116. 

38.  Possession  of  a  part  of  a  tract  of  land  by  one  holding 
a  void  tax  deed  to  the  whole,  will  vest  title,  if  maintained  for 
the  statutory  period. 

Pharis  vs.  Bayless,  122  Mo.,  116. 

39.  Under  the  township  laws,  act  of  1872,  page  210,  a  tax 
deed  executed  by  the  county  treasurer,  as  collector  and  not  as 
treasurer  and  ex-officio  collector,  is  void  on  its  face. 

Cailahan  vs.  Davis,  125  Mo.,  27. 

40.  "Where  a  sale  for  taxes  had  been  made  under  an  assess- 
ment against  one  who  had  no  title,  a  tax  deed  given  thereunder 
may  constitute  color  of  title. 

Moss  vs.  Kauffman,  131  Mo.,  424. 

41.  Under  the  revenue  laws  of  1872,  the  omission  from  a 
tax  deed  of  a  recital  stating  the  year  in  which  the  judgment  for 
taxes  was  rendered  makes  the  deed  void  on  its  face. 

Dameron  vs.  Jamison,  143  Mo.,  483. 

42.  The  revenue  act  of  1847  required  the  collector  after 
having  sold  land  for  taxes  to  return  a  certified  list,  furnished 
by  the  register  with  a  note  opposite  each  tract,  setting  forth  the 
disposition  made  of  it;  if  sold,  to  whom  and  the  amount  paid; 
and  if  not  sold,  the  amount  for  which  it  was  offered  for  sale 
and  for  which  it  was  bid  in  by  the  State.    Unless  these  requi- 
sites are  complied  with,  the  deed  of  the  register  is  a  nullity. 

Donahoe  vs.  Hartless,  33  Mo.,  335. 

43.  The  revenue  act  of  1857  requires  that  the  register  of 
lands  acknowledge  deeds  of  conveyance  made  by  him. 

Stierlin  vs.  Daley,  37  Mo.  484. 

44.  The  Legislature  may  make  a  tax  deed  prima  facie  evi- 
dence of  title;  but  it  cannot  make  it  conclusive  evidence  as  to 
matters  which  are  vitally  essential  to  a  valid  exercise  of  the 

taxing  power. 

Abbott  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.,  166. 

45.  The  recitals  of  a  collector,  that  he  gave  four  weeks 
notice  of  the  intended  sale  "in  the  manner  required  by  law,'- 


160  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

is  insufficient.  The  notice  should  state  the  facts  as  to  how  he 
performed  the  duty  and  leave  the  conclusion  of  law  to  the  de- 
termination of  the  courts. 

Sptirlock  vs.  Allen,  49  Mo.,   198. 

46.  A  tax  deed  must  contain  a  recital  of  the  manner  of 
giving  notice  of  the  sale.    If  it  is  silent  as  to  this,  it  conveys  no 

title. 

Abbott  vs.  Doling,  49  Mo.,  302. 

47.  A  sale  for  taxes  is  usually  ex  parte  and  the  right  of  the 
citizen  cannot  be  divested  unless  it  appears  on  the  face  of  the 
tax  deed  that  the  law  has  been  complied  with. 

Abbott  vs.  Doling,  49  Mo.,  302. 
Spurlock  vs.  Allen,  49  Mo.,  178. 
La  Groue  vs.  Rains,  48  Mo.,  536. 
Abbott  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.,  162. 

48.  Even  where  a  collector's  deed  shows  by  its  recitals 
that  the  law  has  been  complied  with,  it  may  be  contradicted  as 
to  material  matters  by  evidence  in  a  direct  or  collateral  pro- 
ceeding. 

Abbott  vs.   Doling,   49   Mo.,   302. 

49.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  collector  to  set  forth  in  his  deed 
how  and  in  what  manner  he  gave  the  notice  of  the  sale  of  the 
land,  and  the  recital  that  he  gave  the  notice  "in  the  manner  and 
form  as  directed  by  law"  will  not  suffice.    He  must  specifically 
set  forth  in  his  deed  all  the  requirements  of  the  statute. 

Large  vs.  Fisher,  49  Mo.,  307. 
Moore  vs.  Harris,  91  Mo.,  616. 
Bender  vs.  Dungan,  99  Mo.,  126. 

50.  A  tax  deed  given  by  the  register  of  land  reciting  only 
that  the  lands  therein  described  "were  advertised  according  to 
Jaw"  is  void  on  its  face. 

Yankee  vs.  Thompson,  51  Mo.,  234. 

51.  A  tax  deed  which  recites  "that  due  notice  was  given 
of  the  sale,"  and  failing  to  recite  the  manner  of  the  notice  is 

absolutely  void. 

Spurlock  vs.  Allen,  49  Mo.,  178. 
Abbott  vs.  Doling  49,  Mo,.  302. 
Large  vs.  Fisher,  49  Mo.,  307. 
Smith  vs.  Funk,  57  Mo.,  239. 
Moore  vs.  Harris,  91  Mo.,  616. 
Cook  vs.  Farrah,  105  Mo.,  492. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  161 

52.  The  tax  deed  relates  back  to  the  date  of  the  sale  as 
against  the  defendant  in  a  suit,  his  privies  and  strangers  with 
notice. 

State  ex  rel.  Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

53.  Where  possession  has  been  held  under  a  tax  that  has 
been  of  record  for  ten  years,  the  deed  is  admissible  in  evidence, 
although  not  properly  acknowledged. 

Hoge  vs.  Hubb,  94  Mo.,  439. 

54.  Where  a  sale  by  the  collector  of  a  city  of  the  second 
class  is  an  adjourned  one,  his  deed  will  be  void  if  it  does  not 
contain  proper  recitals  as  to  such  adjournments. 

Gregg  vs.  Jeselberg,  113  Mo.,  34. 

55.  .Where  a  tax  deed  is  made  to  an  assignee  of  a  certifi- 
cate of  purchase,  said  deed  must  contain  proper  recitals  as  to 
the  assignment. 

Pitkin  vs.  Shacklett,  106  Mo.,  571. 

56.  A  tax  deed  describing  the  land  as  the  north  46  and 
two-thirds  feet  of  lots  1  to  5  inclusive,  is  void  for  uncertainty. 

Roth  vs.  Gabbert,  123  Mo.,  21. 

57.  The  statutory  requirements  as  to  the  form  of  tax  deeds 
must  be  substantially  complied  with. 

Gregg  vs.  Jeselberg,  113  Mo.,  34. 

58.  Under  the  revenue  act  of  1872,  a  tax  deed  is  void  un- 
less its  recitals  conform  substantially  to  the  requirements  of 
said  act. 

Pitkin  vs.  Shacklett,  106  Mo.,  571. 

59.  The  name  of  the  county  in  which  the  land  is  situated 
need  not  be  repeated  in  the  granting  clause  of  the  deed. 

Roth  vs.  Gabbert,  123  Mo.,  21. 

60.  A  recorded  deed  imparts  notice  of  its  contents,  even 
though  the  record  of  such  deed  be  subsequently  destroyed. 

Greer  vs.  Lumber  and  Mining  Co.,  134  Mo.,  85. 

61.  A  tax  deed  based  upon  an  action  against  a  person 
who  is  dead  at  the  Institution  of  the  suit,  is  void. 

Childers  vs.  Shantz,  120  Mo.,  305. 
D— it 


162  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

62.  A  tax  deed  to  land  forfeited  to  the  State,  under  the 
law  of  1872,  showing  on  its  face  that  the  purchaser  of  the  land 
had  not  paid  the  amount  of  taxes  charged  against  the  land  with 
interest  and  costs  and  penalties,  is  void. 

Atchison  vs.  Improvement  Co.,  125  Mo.,  565. 

63.  Said  deed  must  show  on  its  face  that  the  county  clerk 
issued  the  order  directing  the  collector  to  receive  the  delinquent 
taxes  from  the  purchaser,  and  it  is  void  if  it  fails  to  contain  a 
proper  recital  as  to  the  assignment  of  the  certificate  of  purchase. 

Atchison  vs.  Improvement  Co.,  125  Mo.,  565. 

64.  A  tax  deed  must  be  drawn  so  as  to  constitute  an  in- 
strument which,  under  the  common  law,  would  transfer  title. 

Einstein  vs.  Gay,  45  Mo.,  62. 

65.  A  tax  deed  purporting  to  convey  "all  the  right,  title 
and  interest, ' '  of  the  State  of  Missouri  in  and  to  land,  and  which 
purports  to  convey  the  interest  of  the  owner,  does  not  transfer 
the  legal  title. 

Einstein  vs.  Gay,  45  Mo.,  62. 
Ketchem  vs.  Mullinux,  92  Mo.,   118. 

66.  The  law  of  1865  did  not  designate  the  form  of  tax 
deed,  and  a  common  law  conveyance,  stating  the  power  of  the 
collector,  was  sufficient. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mantz,  62  Mo.,  258. 

67.  Where  the" sheriff 's  deed  in  a  tax  suit  is  founded  on  the 
valid  judgment  and  execution  and  is  in  strict  conformity  to 
the  statute,  such  deed  conveys  the  land  in  question  and  not 
only  the  interest  of  the  owner  therein. 

Allen  vs.  McCabe,  93  Mo.,  138. 

68.  The   following   description   of  the   land   is  sufficient: 
"One  acre,  being  the  southeast  corner  of  the  northeast  fourth 
of  the  southeast  quarter  of  section  2,  township  43,  range  24, 
Henry  county,  Mo." 

Smith  vs.  Nelson,  no  Mo.,  552. 

69.  A  tax  deed  should  contain  recital  showing  compliance 
with  the  statutory  requirements. 

Western  vs.  Flanigan,   120  Mo.r  61. 
Burden  vs.  Taylor,   124  Mo.,  12. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  163 

70.  If  a  tax  deed  contains  any  recital  showing  that  the 
statutory  requirements  have  not  been  fulfilled,  it  is  void. 

Burden  vs.  Taylor,  124  Mo.,  12. 

71.  The  omission  of  the  tax  deed  to  recite  that  the  sale 
was  public,  is  fatal. 

Hopkins  vs.  Smith,  86  Mo.,  144. 
Sullivan  vs.  Donald,  90  Mo.,  278. 
Bingman  vs.  Birmingham,  103  Mo.,  245. 

72.  A  tax  deed  relates  back  to  the  date  of  judgment. 

Fleckenstein  vs.  Basker,  114  Mo.,  493. 

73.  Under  the  law  of  1872  the  title  to  land  purchased  at  a 
tr>x  sale  did  not  vest  until  the  delivery  of  the  deed. 

Hilton  vs.  Smith,  134  Mo.,  499. 

74.  Under  the  revenue  act  of  1865  tax  deeds  were  to  be 
acknowledged  before  the  county  clerk.      An    acknowledgment 
before  a  notary  public  was  fatal  to  their  validity. 

Dunlap  vs.  Henry,  76  Mo.,  106. 

75.  The  charter  of  1889  of  the  city  of  Kansas  authorizes 
the  city  treasurer  to  execute  tax  deeds. 

Chrisman  vs.  Hurl,   146  Mo.,   102. 

76.  A  tax  collector  cannot  have  his  deed  pass  title  from  one 
person  to  another  without  at  least  substantially  complying  with 
the  statutes,  under  which  he  derives  his  a,uthority  to  sell. 

Loring  vs.  Broomer,  142  Mo.,  I. 

77.  A  revenue  law  of  1872  required  that  the  tax  deed 
should  state  the  year  in  which  the  judgment  was  rendered. 
A  deed  under  that  law,  stating  that  judgment  was  rendered  at 
the  "July  term,"  and  omitting  the  year,  is  void. 

Dameron  vs.  Jamison,  143  Mo.,  483. 

78.  The  delivery  of  the  sheriff's  deed  to  the  purchaser  at 
the  tax  sale  is  necessary  in  order  to  transfer  title  to  the  pur- 
chaser. 

McVey  vs.  Carr,  159  Mo.,  648. 

79.  Where  the  deed  shows  that  the  sale  was  unauthorized 
by  law,  it  is  void  on  its  face. 

Mason  et  al.  vs.  Crowder,  85  Mo.,  526. 


164  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

80.  Under  the  Act  of  1825,  unless  the  certificate  of  sale 
was  recorded  within  a  reasonable  time,  the  tax  deed  was  void. 

Reed  vs.  Morton,  9  Mo.,  878. 

81.  A  tax  deed  conveys  only  the  interest  of  the  defendant 
in  the  tax  suit. 

Whelen  vs.  Weaver,  126  Mo.,  430. 


DEFINITIONS. 

1.  A  tax  is  not  a  debt  nor  in  the  nature  of  a  debt  in  its 
essential  characteristics. 

It  is  an  impost  levied  by  authority  of  government  upon  its 
citizens  for  the  support  of  the  State. 

City  of  Carondelet,  vs.  Picot,  38  Mo.,  125. 

2.  Taxes  are  contributions  levied  on  individuals  for  the 
services  of  the  State. 

The  power  to  tax  is  inherent  in  every  sovereignty. 

3.  It  is  not  necessary  that  there  should  be  property  before 
a  tax  can  be  levied. 

Lawyers  and  physicians  may  be  compelled  to  pay  a  license 
for  practicing  their  professions. 
This  is  a  tax.  . 

4.  There  are  three  general  classes  of  direct  taxes:  capita- 
tion, having  effect  solely  upon  persons ;  ad  valorem,  having  effect 
solely  upon  property ;  and  income,  having  mixed  effect  upon  per- 
sons and  property. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

5.  A  tax  differs  materially  from  a  debt. 

The  one  is  founded  on  contract ;  the  other  is  not. 

North  Mo.  R.  R.  vs.  Maguire,  49  Mo.,  490. 

6.  " The  Ordinary  Current  Expenses  of  a  County."— A. 
debt  created  for  the  remodeling  and  improvement  of  the  county 
buildings,  is  not  within  the  ordinary  current  expenses  of  the 
county. 

Book  vs.  Earl,  87  Mo.,  246. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  165 

7.  "Current  County  Expenditures"  mean  expenditures  for 
the  year  for  which  the  taxes  are  levied. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Payne,  151  Mo.,  663. 

8.  "Necessary  Expenses." —The    current    necessary    ex- 
penses of  a  city  of  the  fourth  class  are  not  restricted  to  the  sal- 
ary of  its  officers,  and  a  reasonable  police  force. 

"Income  and  Revenue  Provided  for  Each  Year"  do  not  in- 
clude money  arising  from  the  sale  of  the  city's  lands. 

Waterworks  Company  vs.  Carterville,  142  Mo.,  101. 
"Necessary  Expenses  for  Maintaining  the  Cost  of  a 
City  of  the  Fourth  Class"  are  the  reasonable  salaries  allowed  by 
Jaw,  to  the  mayor,  council,  assessor,  marshal,  constable,  attorney 
and  a  reasonable  police  force  of  such  city. 

Waterworks  Company  vs.  Carterville,  153  Mo.,  128. 

10.  "All  Property,"  when  used  in  reference  to  taxation, 
includes  every  kind  of  property  not  expressly  or  by  necessary 
implication  excepted. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  153  Mo.,  157. 

11.  An  undetermined  tax  is,  in  law,  no  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ashbrook,  154  Mo.,  375. 

12.  "Taxes  for  Public  Purposes."— A  collateral  inherit- 
ance tax  of  five  per  cent,  on  all  property  descending  or  devised 
to  nephews,  nieces  or  other  collateral  kindred,  if  levied  for  the 
State  University,  is  a  tax  for  public  purpose. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Switzler,  143  Mo.,  287. 

13.  The  term  "county  taxes"  includes  road  taxes  within 
the  meaning  of  the  provisions  of  the  charter  of  the  Hannibal  & 
St.  Joseph  Kailway  Company,  exempting  it  from  county  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railway  Company,  101  Mo..,  120. 

14.  Merchants  within  the  meaning  of  the  charter  of  Kansas 
City,  means  dealers  in  every  kind  of  commercial  commodities, 
including  produce  dealers. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Lorber,  64  App.,  604. 

15.  The  term  merchant,  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  used 
in  the  charter  of  Kansas  City,  is  sufficiently  generic  to  compre- 


166  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

hend  within  its  signification,  one  who  is  engaged  in  the  business 
of  selling  fresh  meats  at  wholesale  from  cars. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.  Dye,  72  App.,  214. 

16.  A  wholesale  dealer,  under  section  417,  of  the  ordinance 
of  Kansas  Ctiy,  may  be  one  who  sells  ice  to  other  ice  dealers. 

There  is  a  distinction  in  the  commercial  word  between  a 
*  *  wholesale  dealer ' '  and  a  ' t  manufacturer. ' ' 

The  terms  "wholesale  dealer"  and  "manufacturer"  will 
remain  a  question  for  the  courts. 

The  fact  that  the  manufacturer  sells,  does  not  make  him  a 
dealer. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Butt,  88  App.,  237. 

17.  Ice  dealers  fall  within  the  definition  of  merchants  in 
the  charter  of  Kansas  City. 

A  "merchant"  is  one  who  traffics  or  carries  on  trade. 
He  is  a  trafficer  as  well  as  a  trader. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Vmdiquest,  36  App.,  584. 

18.  "Peddlers."  —  The  proper  signification  of  the  term  is 
said  to  be  a  small  retail  dealer,  who,  carrying  his  merchandise 
with  him,  travels  from  house  to  house,  exposing  his  goods  for 
sale  and  selling  them. 

The  distinctive  feature  consists  in  the  fact  that  a  peddler 
goes  from  house  to  house,  or  place  to  place,  carrying  his  articles 
of  merchandise  with  him  and  concurrently  sells  and  delivers. 

He  is  an  itinerant  trader,  who  goes  from  place  to  place  and 
from  house  to  house,  carrying  for  sale  and  exposing  for  sale, 
the  goods,  wares  or  merchandise  which  he  carries ;  a  traveling 
trader ;  one  who  carries  about  small  commodities  upon  his  back, 
or  in  a  cart  or  wagon  and  sells  them. 

State  vs.  Hoffman,  50  App.,  585. 

City  of  Moberly  vs.  Hoover,  93  App.,  663. 

19.  "Mercantile  Agent." —One  who  goes  from  house  to 
house  with  samples  of  goods,,  soliciting  orders  for  future  de- 
livery; but  who  does  not  sell,  or  offer  to  sell  and  deliver  the 
goods ;  but  when  an  order  is  taken  by  him,  it  is  sent  to  the  busi- 
ness house  in  another  city  for  which  he  delivers,  such  person  is 
a  mercantile  agent  within  the  meaning  of  the  statute  authorizing 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs.  167 

cities  of  the  third  class  to  levy  and  collect  a  license  on  peddlers, 
drummers  and  mercantile  agents. 

City  of  Brookfield  vs.  Kitchen,  163  Mo.,  546. 

20.  A  "butcher"  is  one  who  slaughters  animals  or  dresses 
their  flesh  for  market,  but  an  ordinance  may  use  the  word  in  a 
broader  sense,  as,  the  keeper  of  a  meat  market. 

City  of  Rockville  vs.  Merchant,  60  App.,  365. 

21.  "Property"  is  nomen  generalissimum,  and  extends  to 
every  species  of  valuable  right  and  interest,  including  real  and 
personal  property,  easements,  franchises  and  other  incorporeal 
hereditaments. 

The  words  "the  road  and  property  of  the  several  com- 
panies," as  used  in  the  Act  of  March  3,  1857,  and  as  applied  to 
the  Cairo  &  Fulton  Railroad  Company,  mean  all  the  lands  as 
well  as  the  road  and  its  appurtenances. 

Wilson  vs.  Beckwith,  140  Mo.,  359. 

22.  The  fiscal  year,  of  the  State  begins  on  January  first, 
and  ends  on  December  thirty-first. 

Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Appleby,  136  Mo.,  408. 

23.  A  county  fiscal  year  is  a  calendar  year. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Allison,  155  Mo.,  325. 
Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

24.  To  assess  a  "tax"  is  to  declare  it  to  be  payable;  to 
"levy"  it,  is  to  raise  or  collect  it. 

Valle  vs.  Fargo,  i  App.,  344. 

25.  Taxation  does  not  mean  assessment  for  taxation. 

Hotel  Company  vs.  County  Court,  62  Mo.,  134. 

26.  In  the  sense  that  taxes  can  be  levied  only  for  a  public 
purpose,  the  word  includes  every  character  and  kind  of  tax,  gen- 
eral or  special. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Switzler,  143  Mo.,  287. 

27.  Taxes  are  charges  imposed  upon  persons  or  property 
to  raise  money  for  a  public  purpose  or  to  defray  the  expense  of 
administering  the  government. 

Sheehan  vs.  Hospital,  50  Mo..  155. 


168  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

28.  Revenue.— Money  raised  by  taxation  is  revenue  with- 
out regard  to  the  purposes  for  which  it  is  appropriated  or  ap- 
plied. 

Railroad  vs.  Maguire,  49  Mo.,  490. 


DESCRIPTIONS. 

1.  A  description  of  land  in  a  tax  deed  must  conform  to  that 
contained  in  the  anterior  proceedings. 

Lowe  vs.  Ekey,  82  Mo.,  286. 

2.  An  imperfect  description  of  land  contained  in  a  tax-hill, 
judgment,  execution  and  sheriff's  deed,  may,  if  the  ambiguity  is 
latent  and  susceptible  of  oral  explanations,  be  made  certain  by 
extrinsic  evidence. 

It  is  sufficient  that  the  description  is  such,  that  the  land  can 
be  located  by  one  acquainted  with  the  plats  and  surveys. 
Brown  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  262. 

3.  No  judgment  can  be  rendered  against  property  differ- 
ent from  that  described  in  the  petition  and  order  of  publica- 
tion. 

Milner  vs.  Shipley,  94  Mo.,  106. 

4.  The  description  of  the  property  in  the  tax-bill  as  lot  43, 
block  7,  Old  Town  of  Pacific,  Frankfort  county,  and  the  tax  as 
' '  school  tax"  for  1879,  sufficiently  indicates  the  fund  to  which  the 
tax  belongs,  which  is  all  the  tax-bill  is  required  to  show. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ran,  93  Mo.,  126. 

5.  Where  the  petition  in  a  tax  suit  contains  no  description 
of  the  land,  although  the  tax-bill  filed  therewith  does,  the  judg- 
ment rendered  thereon  is  void,  and  open  to  collateral  attack. 

Vaughan  vs.  Daniels,  98  Mo.,  230. 

6.  A  petition  in  an  action  against  a  railroad  for  delinquent 
taxes  need  not  describe  the  property  otherwise  than  as  so  many 
miles  of  a  given  value,  with  a  proper  proportion  of  the  value  of 
the  rolling  stock  added. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  101  Mo.,  136. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  163 

7.  A  description  in  a  sheriff's  deed,  made  under  a  sale  for 
taxes,  was  as  follows:     "One  acre  being  the  southeast  corner  of 
the  northeast  fourth  of  the  southwest  quarter  of  section  2,  town- 
ship 43,  range  24,  Henry  county,  Missouri. "    Held  sufficient 
to  convey  an  acre  in  a  square  form. 

Error  in  the  description  of  land  on  the  tax  books  will  not  be 
reviewed  in  ejectment. 

Smith  vs.  Nelson,  no  Mo.,  552. 

8.  The  headings  of  the  columns  of  an  assessment  roll  are 
part  of  the  lands  assessed. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Vaile,  122  Mo.,  33. 

9.  A  description  of  land  in  a  tax  deed  as  "two  acres  in  the 
northwest  quarter  of  section  6,  township  49,  range  33,  the  prop- 
erty of  H.  L.,"  is  fatally  defective. 

Western  vs.  Flanagan,  120  Mo.,  61. 

10.  A  tax  deed  which  describes  the  land  conveyed  as  l  i  the 
north  forty-six  and  two-thirds  (462-3)  feet  of  lots  one  (1)  to 
five  (5)  inclusive,  etc.,?>  is  void  for  uncertainty. 

Roth  vs.  Gabber t,  123  Mo.,  21. 

11.  Where  the  tax  judgment  describes  one  tract  of  land 
and  the  order  of  publication  another,  the  description  contained  in 
the  order  of  publication  will  control  and  the  recital  in  the  judg- 
ment must  be  substantially  the  order  itself. 

Stewart  vs.  Allison,  150  Mo.,  343. 

12.  A  description  calling  for  the  south  60  feet  or  the  north 
1 21  feet,  etc.,  of  lot  4,  etc.,  was  descriptive  by  metes  and  bounds. 

Where  the  description  in  a  tax-bill  is  sufficient  to  pass  title 
in  a  deed,  such  tax-bill  will  create  such  lien  upon  the  property  as 

may  be  enforced  by  judicial  sale. 

i 

Adkins  vs.  Quest,  79  App.,  36. 


EJECTMENT. 

1.  The  recording  of  a  sheriff's  deed,  made  under  the  Act 
of  1877,  does  not  authorize  the  bringing  of  a  suit  in  ejectment, 
where  no  one  is  in  possession  of  the  land. 


170  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 

It  is  only  the  recording  of  the  tax  deed  made  under  the 
Laws  of  1872,  that  will  warrant  the  bringing  of  an  action  for 
possession. 

Vastine  vs.  Land  and  Improvement  Company.   135 
Mo.,  145. 

2.  Under  section  222,  p.  209,  2  W.  S.,  ejectment  may  be 
maintained  against  the  grantee  in  the  tax  deed,  who  has  put  the 
same  to  record,  although  he  is  not  in  actual  possession  of  the 
land 

Section  222,  p.  1207,  2  W.  S.,  giving  a  right  of  action  to  re- 
cover possession  of  land  against  persons  placing  tax  deeds  on 
record,  only  applies  where  the  land  is  vacant. 

Callahan  vs.  Davis,  103  Mo.,  444. 

3.  The  burden  is  on  the  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  to  show 
that  the  defendant  in  a  tax  suit  is  the  owner  of  the  land. 

Powell  vs.  Greenstreet,  95  Mo.,  13. 

4.  Errors  of  descriptions  on  tax  books  will  not  be  reviewed 
in  ejectment. 

Such  defense  should  be  made  in  a  suit  for  taxes. 

Smith  vs.  Nelson,  no  Mo.,  552. 

5.  Section  7698,  E.  S.  1889,  which  provides  that  any  person 
putting  a  tax  deed  on  record,  shall  be  deemed  to  have  set  up  such 
title  as  to  enable  the  claimant  to  prosecute  an  action  for  the  pos- 
session, has  no  application  to  the  sheriff's  sale  under  an  execu- 
tion issued  on  a  judgment  on  a  suit  to  enforce  the  State's  lien 
for  delinquent  taxes 

Chiiders  vs.  Schantz,  120  Mo.,  305. 

In  ejectment  the  title  acquired  at  a  tax  sale  will  prevail  as 
against  one  who  derives  title  under  a  trust  deed. 

Cowell  vs.  Gray,  85  Mo.,  169. 
Gitchell  vs.  Kreidler,  84  Mo.,  472. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  171 


EVIDENCE  IN  TAX  SUITS. 

1.  A  properly  certified  tax  bill  is  prima  facie  evidence  that 
the  amount  claimed  therein  is  correct  and  that  the  property  is 
liable  therefor. 

Ewart  vs.  Davis,  76  Mo.,  129. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Schooley,  84  Mo.,  447. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ran,  93  Mo.,  126. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mastin,  103  Mo.,  508. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Maloney,  113  Mo.,  367. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Davis,  131  Mo.,  457. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tobacco  Company,  140  Mo.,  218. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Fullerton,  143  Mo.,  682. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phillips,  137  Mo.,  259. 

2.  Tax  bills  are  prima  facie  evidence  by  virtue  of  the 
statute. 

The  Legislature  has  power  to  enact  such  a  law. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Railroad,  77  Mo.,  180. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hoyt,  123  Mo.,  348. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Davis,  131  Mo.,  457. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Oeters,  36  Mo.,  456. 

3.  The  provision  of  the    delinquent    tax    law,    making   a 
collector's  certificate  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  facts  therein 
recited,  is  not  unconstitutional,  as  impairing  the  right  of  trial 
by  jury. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  VanEvery,  75  Mo.,  530. 

4.  The  Legislature  has  no  power  to  make  tax  deeds  con- 
clusive evidence  as  to  matters  which  are  essential  to  the  valid 
exercise  of  the  taxing  power. 

Abbott  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.,  162. 
Railey  vs.  Guinn,  76  Mo.,  263. 

5.  The  burden  is  on  the  defendant  to  show  that  tax- bills, 
introduced  in  evidence,  are  illegal. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mastin,  103  Mo.,  508. 
vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Phillips,  137  Mo.,  259. 

6.  The  Legislature  has  power  to  provide  a  summary  mode 
for  collecting  taxes. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Coons,  37  Mo.,  45. 


172  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

7.  A  tax-bill,  authenticated  by  the  certificate  of  the  col- 
lector, and  filed  with  the  petition,  setting   forth   the   personal 
back-taxes  of  the  defendant,  is  admissible  in  evidence  and  es- 
tablishes a  prima  facie  case. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Renshaw,  166  Mo.,  682. 

8.  It  is  only  a  certified  back-tax  bill,  from  a  legal  back-tax 
book,  made  from  a  correct  delinquent  list,  certified  and  filed 
by  order  of  the  county  court,  which  is  prima  facie  evidence  that 
the  amount  claimed  is  correct. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Scott,  96  Mo.,  72. 

9.  If  it  appears  that  the  county  court  fails  to  correct  errors 
in  the  delinquent  list,  and  to  certify  it  as  corrected  to  the  county 
clerk,  the  effect  is  to  overcome  the  prima  facie  case  made  by 
introducing  the  tax-bill. 

And  the  plaintiff  must  produce  other  evidence  or  fail. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hutchinson,  116  Mo.,  399. 

10.  The  tax  books  are  primary  and  best  evidence. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rau,  93  Mo.,  126. 

Vaughan  vs.  Daniels,  98  Mo.,  230. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hutchinson,  116  Mo.,  399. 

11.  If  the  tax-bills  are  destroyed,  the  State  may  establish 
its  case  by  other  competent  evidence. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank,  144  Mo.,  381. 

12.  Where  the  tax  books  have  been  destroyed,  the  collector 
may  resort  to  secondary  evidence. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Schooley,  84  Mo.,  447. 

13.  If  the  prima  facie  case  made  by  the  introduction  of  the 
tax-bill  is  overthrown,  or  if  the  bill  is  rejected  as  evidence,  plain- 
tiff may  still  make  out  his  case  by  producing  his  tax  book  in 
evidence,  if  such  book  show  that  the  taxes  were  properly  assessed 
and  levied  and  are  unpaid. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hutchinson,  116  Mo.,  399. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank,  144  Mo.,  381. 

14.  Unless  the  recitals  of  a  tax-bill  show  compliance  with 
the  law,  the  Auditor's  certificate  of  the  sale  of  land  for  taxes, 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs.  173 

under  the  Act  of  January  3,  1827,  is  not  prima  facie  evidence  of 
a  legal  sale. 

Morton  vs.  Reeds,  6  Mo.,  64. 

15.  The  prima  facie  case  made  by  the  introduction  of  the 
tax-bill  may  be  overcome  by  showing  that  the  bill  is  not  based 
on  a  valid  assessment.     The  effect  of  a  back-tax  bill  as  evidence 
is  destroyed,  when  it  appears  that  the  county  court  did  not  take 
such  action  on  the  delinquent  list  as  is  contemplated  by  section 
7669,  R.  S.  1889. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Scott,  96  Mo.,  72. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hurt,  113  Mo.,  90. 

16.  Where  the  tax-bill  against  a  bank,  based  upon  an  as- 
sessment made  prior  to  the  taking  effect  of  the  act  of  1895  (Laws 
of  1895,  page  242),  shows  that  the  assessment  was  made  against 
the  bank  itself,  and  not  against  the  stockholders,  the  prima 
facie  case  is  overcome. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Merchants'  Bank,  160  Mo.,  640. 

17.  The  prima  facie  case  made  by  the  introduction  of  the 
tax-bill,  may  be  impeached  by  showing  that  the  action  of  the 
Board  of  Equalization  was  illegal. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cunningham,  153  Mo.,  642. 

18.  Under  the  act  of  1875,  certificates  duly  certified  by  the 
clerk  of  the  county  court,  are  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  lia- 
bilities of  a  railroad  for  city  taxes. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Railroad,  81  Mo.,  285. 

19.  Section  7728,  E.  S.  1889,  does  not  make  tax-bills   evi- 
dence in  suits  against  railroads. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Davis,  131  Mo.  457. 

20.  A  tax-bill  may  be  amended  during  trial. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phillips,  102  Mo.,  664. 

21.  Upon  a  proper  showing,  a  sheriff  may  amend  his  re- 
turn to  an  execution,  issued  in  a  tax  judgment. 

Savings  Bank  vs.  Grewe,  84  Mo.,  477. 

22.  The  order  of  a  county  court,  levying  the  railroad  taxes 
for  omitted  years,  under  section  6879,  K.  S.  1879,  which  recites 


174  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

that  the  years  were  omitted,  is  prima  facie  evidence  of  such 
omission. 

State  ex-rel.  vs.  Railroad  ,101  Mo.,  136. 

23.  Section  212  of  the  revenue  act  of  1872,  providing  that 
the  "assessment  book,  and  all  books,  papers  and  records  in  the 
office  of  the  clerk  of  the  county  court  relating  to  the  subject  of 
taxation  or  copies  thereof,  duly  certified  by  such  clerk,  shall  be 
evidence  in  all  courts  in  controversies  concerning  the  validity  on 
sales  of  lands  for  taxes, "  was  repealed  by  the  delinquent  tax 
act  of  April  12.  1877. 

Gibbs  vs.  Southern,  116  Mo.,  204. 

24.  Tax-bills  of  cities  of  the  third  class,  when  duly  certi- 
fied by  the  city  collector,  are  prima  facie  evidence. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Edwards,  162  Mo.,  660. 

25.  Evidence  of  inequality  of  valuation  in  the  assessment 
of  taxes  is  inadmissible. 

Town  of  Potosi  vs.  Casey,  27  Mo.,  372. 

26.  A  city  may  pass  an  ordinance  providing  that  special 
tax-bills  shall  be  prima  facie  evidence  of  liability. 

Eyerman  vs.  Blaksley,  78  Mo.,  145. 

27.  A  copy  of  the  tax  list,  duly  certified  by  the  proper  of- 
ficer is  admissible  in  evidence  under  the  rules  of  the  common 

law. 

Wilcoxson  vs.  Darr,  139  Mo.,  660. 

28.  Where  the  record  does  not  disclose  proof  of  an  aver- 
ment that  the  tax  was  levied,  there  can  be  no  recovery,  even 
though  the  assessment  was  admitted. 

City  of  Mexico  vs.  Cauthorn,  25  App.,  258. 

29.  A  judgment  will  not  be  set  aside  on  the  ground  that 
the  relator  was  not  the  collector  of  the  county  where  a  tax-bill 
certified  to  by  him  as  collector,  was  introduced  without  objec- 
tion. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Richardson,  77  Mo.,  589. 

30.  A  deed  from  the  State  Auditor  for  land  sold  for  taxes 
in  1834,  was  insufficient  to  establish  title  under  the  statutes 
pertaining  thereto. 

Moreati  vs.  Detchemendy,  41  Mo.,  432. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  175 

31.  A  tax  deed  made  by  the  comity  treasurer,  as  ex  officio 
collector  is  not  admissible  in  evidence,  in  the  absence  of  proof 
that  the  office  of  collector  had  devolved  upon  the  treasurer,  by 
reason  of  the  adoption  of  township  organization. 

Spurlock  vs.  Dougherty,  81   Mo.,  171. 

32.  Special  bills  are  prima  facie  evidence  of  the  liability 
which  they  purport  to  declare. 

Wolfort  vs.  City  of  St.  Louis,  115  Mo.,  139. 

33.  It  is  no  defense  to  a  tax  suit  that  informalities  occur 
in  making  the  assessment,  in  the  preparation  of  the  tax  list,  or 
that  the  assessment  was  not  made  within  the  time  required  by 
law,  or  that  back  taxes  were  not  consolidated  in  one  book. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phillips,  137  Mo.,  259. 


EXEMPTIONS  FROM  TAXATION. 

1.  The  abandonment  of  the  right  to  tax  is  never  presumed. 

vSt.  Louis  vs.  Boatmans'  Insurance  Company,  47  Mo., 

150. 

Railroad  vs.  Cass  County,  53  Mo.,   17. 
Railroad  Company  vs.  Maguir^    49  Mo.,  490. 
Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 
Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  .157  Mo.,  51. 

2.  The  language  exempting  property  from  taxation  must 
be  in  clear  and  unambiguous  terms. 

Pacific    Railroad    Company    vs.    Cas:-    County,    53 

Mo.,   17. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad.  89  Mo,  523. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  99  Mo.,  30. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Arnold,  136  Mo.,  446. 

3.  Exemptions  from  taxation  cannot  be  extended  by  con- 
struction beyond  the  plain  terms  of  the  grant. 

Laws  and  ordinances  granting  exemptions  must  be  strictly 
construed. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Smith,  138  Mo..  645. 
Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 


176  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lotus. 

4.  In  the  construction  of  laws  exempting  property  from 
taxation,  it  is  a  cardinal  principle  that  they  must  be  strictly  con- 
strued, and  it  devolves  on  the  person  claiming  that  any  specific 
property  is  exempt  to  show  it  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt. 

Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

5.  In  no  case  will  an  exemption  be  presumed,  and  in  case 
of  doubt  it  will  be  resolved  most  strongly  against  the  party 
claiming  the  exemption. 

Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

6.  It  is  generally  held  that  a  charitable  or  benevolent  as- 
sociation, whose  acts  of  charity  are  restricted  to  their  own  sick 
and  needy  members,  and  their  families,  and  the  widows  and 
orphans  of  their  members,  are  not  institutions  of  purely  public 
charity,  and  hence  the  property  of  such  institutions  is  not  ex- 
empt from  taxation. 

But  there  is  a  material  difference  between  what  is  denomi- 
nated a  public  charity  and  what  is  meant  by  the  words  "used 
for  purposes  purely  charitable. "  Therefore,  under  this  statute, 
the  property  of  a  lodge  which  provides  for  the  care  of  its  sick 
and  needy  members  and  their  families,  looks  to  the  welfare  of 
the  orphans  and  widows  of  its  deceased  members,  is  exempt 
from  taxation. 

Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

7.  A  Legislature  may  divest  itself  and  its  successors  of 
the  power  to  tax  corporations  and  persons. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 

8.  The  provision  of  the  Constitution,  exempting  certain 
property  from  taxation,  has  reference  only  to  general  taxation 
for  the  purpose  of  revenue. 

vState  vs.  Linn  Co.  Court,  44  Mo.,  504. 

9.  Where  the  Legislature  exempts  property  from  taxation, 
and  makes  no  provision  for  the  collection  of  taxes  already  as- 
sessed, such  taxes  cannot  be  collected  after  the  exemption  is 
declared. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Academy. of  Science,  13  App.,  213. 

10.  Bonds  of  the  Masonic  Lodge  Association  are  not  ex- 


Digest  of  the  Rci'enuc  Laws.  177 

empt  from  taxation  on  the  ground  that  the  law  makes  no  special 
provision  for  taxing  such  securities. 

State  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  47  Mo.,  594. 

11.  The  law  providing  that  the  stock  of  a  railroad  com- 
pany shall  be  exempt  from  taxation,  excludes  the  taxation  of 
its  road-bed,  depots,  lands,  machinery,  etc. 

Railroad  vs.  Shacklett,  30  Mo.,  550. 
State  vs.  Railroad,  37  Mo.,  265. 
State  vs.  Dulle,  48  Mo.,  282. 

12.  Keal  estate  used  as  a  cemetery  cannot  be  assessed  for 
taxes. 

State  ex   rel.   vs.   Wesleyian   Cemetery  Association, 
ii  App.,  560. 

13.  Although  the  charter  of  a  cemetery  provides  that  it 
shall  be  exempt  from  taxation,  so  long  as  it  is  dedicated  to  that 
purpose,  the  exemption  does  not  include  a  lot  of  ground  belong- 
ing thereto,  and  which  is  rented  for  husbandry. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Lange,  16  App.,  468. 

14.  An  exemption  from  State  taxes  does  not  operate  as  an 
exemption  from  county  taxes. 

Railroad  vs.  Cass  County,  53  Mo.,  17. 

15.  An  act  of  the  Legislature,  not  founded  on  a  considera- 
tion, providing  that  property  belonging  to  a  certain  body  or 
corporation,  shall  not  be  taxed,  may  be  repealed  by  a  subsequent 
Legislature. 

Washington  University  vs.  Rowse,  42  Mo.,  308. 

16.  One  Legislature  may  grant  certain  privileges  and  im- 
munities from  taxation,  and  another  Legislature  may  repeal 
that  grant. 

Abbott  vs.  Lindenbower,  42  Mo.,  166. 

17.  Property  occupied  by  the  National  Government  is  not 
exempt  from  taxation,  unless  owned  by  it. 

Speed  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  42  Mo.,  382. 

18.  The  capital  stock  of  a  corporation  invested  in  United 
States  bonds,  is  not  subject  to  taxation  by  the  State. 

Savings  Association  vs.  Lightner,  42  Mo.,  421. 
D— 12 


178  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

19.  The  capital  of  a  private  bank,  invested  in  United  States? 
bonds,  is  not  taxable  by  the  State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rogers,  79  Mo.,  283. 

20.  The  Act  of  September  20th,  1852,  exempted  the  Hanni- 
bal and  St.  Joseph  railroad  from  State  taxation,  except  as  pro- 
vided in  section  three  of  that  act.    But  under  that  act,  the  road 
was  not  exempt  from  school  tax. 

Livingston  County  vs.  Railroad,  60  Mo.,  516. 

21..  A  hospital  building  is  exempt  from  taxation,  even 
though  certain  patients  pay  for  what  they  receive,  provided 
that  it  appears  that  the  profits  derived  therefrom  are  applied 
exclusively  to  the  charitable  purposes  of  the  institution. 

«  State  ex  rel.  vs.  Powers,  10  App.,  263. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Powers,  74  Mo.,  476. 

22.  Section  forty,  of  Wagner's  Statute,  page  752,  declar- 
ing that  the  payment  of  certain  fees  from  life  insurance  com- 
panies shall  be  received  in  lieu  of  taxes,  does  not  have  the  effect 
of  exempting  such  companies  from  taxation. 

Life  Association  vs.   Board  of  Assessors,  49  Mo., 
512. 

23.  The  Legislature  has  the  power  to  exempt  from  taxa- 
tion, lands  in  the  city  of  Palmyra,  which  have  not  been  laid  out 
in  town  lots  and  which  were  valuable  only  for  agricultural 
purposes. 

Lee  vs.  Thomas,  49  Mo.,  112. 

24.  Section  five   of  the  Act  of  March  30,  1887,  providing 
for  the  extension  of  the  limits  of  cities  of  the  second  class,  and 
exempting  certain  lands  therein  from  taxation,  is  unconstitu- 
tional. 

Copeland  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  417. 
25:     That  part   of  section  1466,  E.  S.  1889,  exempting  from 
taxation  for  city  purposes,  pastoral  lands  lying  within  cities 
of  the  third  class,  is  unconstitutional. 

Copeland  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  417. 
Westport  ex  rel.  vs.  McGee,  128  Mo.,  152. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wardell,  153  Mo.,  319. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  179 

26.  The  State  can  impose  taxes  on  property  previously 
exempt,  or  raise  the  rate  of  taxation,  unless  there  has  been  some 
express  contract  in  limitation  of  the  power. 

Railroad  vs.  Maguire,  49  Mo.,  490. 

27.  The  Pacific  Railroad  Company  is  not  exempt  from  the 
tax  of  ten  or  fifteen  per  cent,  imposed  upon  it  by  the  ordinance 
of  April  8th,  1865,  nor  does  the  Act  of  February  10th,  1864, 
amount  to  such  contract  as  limits  the  right  of  the  State  to  impose 
the  tax. 

Railroad  Company  vs.  Maguire,  49  Mo.,  490. 
Railroad  Company  vs.  Maguire,  51  Mo.,   142. 
Railroad  Company  vs.  Laclede  County,  57  Mo.,  147. 

28.  Legislative  bodies  have  the  power  to  select  subjects  of 
taxation  and  to  exempt  other  subjects. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 

29.  The  charter  of  a  railroad  company,  exempting  its  stock 
from  taxation,  is  not  repealed  by  a  constitutional  provision, 
adopted  after  the  acceptance  of  the  charter  declaring  that  no 
property  shall  be  exempt. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad,  65  Mo.,  123. 

30.  Under  the  Constitution,  the  property,  real  and  per- 
sonal, of  the  State,  county  and  other  municipal  corporations, 
is  exempt  from  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Heman,  70  Mo.,  441. 
Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

31.  Section     thirty-two    of  the  Act  of  1856,  and  sectiou 
32   of  the  Act  of  1861,  constituted  and  created  a  contract  be- 
tween the  State  and  banks  incorporated  in  this  State,  and  ex- 
empted them  from  all  taxes  other  than  one  per  cent   on  their 
capital,  and  prevented  any  county,  city  or  town  from  levying 
or  collecting  a  tax  from  them.    Such  contracts  are  binding  and 
neither  the  Legislature   nor  the  courts  have  the  right  to  vary 
or  impair  them. 

Lionberger  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  67. 

Mechanics'  Bank  vs.  City  of  Kansas,  73  Mo.,  555. 

32.  Municipal  corporations  have  no  power  to  grant  ex- 


180  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 

emptions  from  taxation,  or  to  commute  taxes  already  assessed. 
A  contract  which  undertakes  to  do  this  is  void. 

State  vs.  Railroad  Company,  75  Mo.,  208. 
St.  Louis  vs.  Meier,  77  Mo.,  13. 
Vrana  vs.  St.  Louis,   164  Mo.,  146. 

33.  By  the  Act  passed  January  7th,  1853,  the  capital  stock 
and  all  other  property  of  the  North  Missouri  Railroad,  were 
exempt  from  taxation,  until  January,  1858,  and  after  that  date, 
so  long  as  section  six,  of  the  Act  of  1853  remained  unrepealed, 
the  property  of  the  company  was  subject  to  taxation  only  as 
personal  property. 

State  vs.  Railroad,  77  Mo.,  202. 

34.  The  city  of  St.  Louis  is  without  power  to  exempt  prop- 
erty from  general  taxation,  or  from  special  assessments. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Meier,  77  Mo.,  13. 
Vrana  vs.  City  of  St.  Louis,  164  Mo.,  146. 

35.  A  school  building  is  subject  to  taxation  when  used  for 
other  than  educational  purposes. 

Wyman  vs.  City  of  St.  Louis,  17  Mo.,  335. 
Gymnastic  Association  vs.  Hudson,  12  App.,  342. 
Gymnastic  Association  vs.  Hudson,  85  Mo.,  32. 

36.  Exemption  from  taxation  is  a  non-transferable,  personal 
privilege 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  89  Mo.,  523. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  99  Mo.,  30. 

37.  Property  which  is  exempt  from  taxation  may  be  as- 
sessed with  special  benefits  for  local  improvements. 

Sheehan  vs.  Good  Samaritan  Hospital,  50  Mo.,  155. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Kansas  City,  89  Mo.,  34. 
City  of  Clinton  ex  rel.  vs.  Henry  County,  115  Mo., 
557- 

38.  Under  section  5012,  E.  S.  1879,  property  within  the 
limits  of  an  incorporated  village  or  town,  is  exempt  from  taxa- 
tion for  road  purposes,  whether  owned  by  a  resident  or  non- 
resident of  such  village  or  town. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  90  Mo.,  166. 

39.  Under   section  6659,:  E.   8.   1879,  premises  used  and 
occupied  by  the  Bishops  of  the  M.  E.  Church,  are  exempt  from 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  181 

taxation  on  the  ground  that  such  premises  are  used  for  pur- 
poses purely  charitable. 

Bishop's   Residence  Company  vs.   Hudson,  91   Mo., 

67i. 

40.  The  term  county  tax,  within  the  meaning  of  the  charter 
of  the  Hannibal  and  St.  Joseph  Railroad  Company,  includes 
road  taxes  and  exempts  said  road  from  taxation  therefor. 

Love  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  120. 

41.  A  property  owner  in  a  town,  which  is  incorporated 
under  a  special  charter,  containing  no  provisions  for  exempt- 
ing the  property  from  taxation  for  road  purposes,  is  not  entitled 
to  such  exemptions. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Arnold,  136  Mo.,  446. 

42.  The  Act  of  February  16th,   1847,  incorporating  the 
Hannibal  and  St.  Joseph  Railroad,  exempts  the  stock  of  said 
company  from  taxation  for  city  and  county  purposes.     This 
exemption  includes  a  tax  levied  to  pay  bonds  given  by  the 
county  for  stock  in  said  railroad  company. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  136. 

43.  The  Act  of  March  21st,  1868,  to  aid  in  the  building  of 
a  branch  railroad,  does  not  exempt  such  roads  from  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  89  Mo.,  523. 

44.  A  township  tax  levied  by  a  county  court  to  pay  bonds 
issued  in  aid  of  a  railroad,  is  not  a  county  tax  within  the  mean- 
ing of  the  original  charter  of  the  Hannibal  and  St.  Joseph 
Railroad,  exempting  it  from  county  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  136. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  113  Mo.,  297. 

45.  Section  5012,  E.  S.  1879,  exempting  from  road  taxes 
the  property  of  persons  residing  within  the  limits  of  an  incor- 
porated village  or  town,  applies  to  property  within  such  village 
or  town  owned  by  non-residents. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  90  Mo.,  166. 

46.  Under  the  Constitution,  as  it  existed  in  1853,  a  Legis- 
lature could  exempt  the  property  of  a  college  from  taxation. 

St.  Vincent's  College  vs.  Schaefer,  104  Mo.,  261. 


182  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 

47.  The  granting  of  an  exemption  from  taxation  by  the 
Legislature,  creates  a  binding  contract  on  the  part  of  the  State, 
which  cannot  be  abrogated  in  the  absence  of  the  right  reserved. 

St.  Vincent's  College  vs.  Schaefer,  104  Mo.,  261. 

48.  Exemption  from  taxation  of  a  lot,  1 1  with  the  buildings 
thereon"  used  for  school  purposes,  does  not  exempt  the  office 
furniture  nor  a  chemical  laboratory,  not  annexed  to  the  build- 
ing. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Medical  College,  in   Mo.,  141. 

49.  The  provisions  of  sections  six  and  seven,  article  ten. 
and  of  section  sixteen,  article  eleven,  of  the  Constitution  of 
1875,  and  1865,  respectively,  in  relation  to  exempting  certain 
property  from  taxation,  are  prospective  and  do  not  repeal  a 
prior  special  law,  exempting  from  taxation  the  property  of  a 
private  corporation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  St.  Joseph  Convent  of  Mercy,  116 
Mo.,  575. 

50.  To  be  relieved  of  a  road  poll  tax,  one  who  is  listed  as 
an  able  bodied  person,  must  prove  his  disability  and  obtain  a 
certificate  of  exemption  from  work  by  the  county  court.     In 
the  absence  of  such  certificate,  the  defense  of  disability  cannot 
be  invoked  in  a  suit  for  the  tax. 

Moore  vs.  Vaughan,  127  Mo.,  538. 

51.  Property  situate  in  a  city  incorporated  under  a  special 
charter,  is  not  exempt  from  taxation  for  road  taxes,  unless  the 
charter  contains  provisions  therefor. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Arnold,  136  Mo.,  446. 

52.  Where  the  law  omits  certain  property  from  taxation, 
the  courts  cannot  direct  how  it  shall  be  taxed. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Building  and  Loan  Association,  145 
Mo.,  50. 

53.  Where  words  of  general  description  are  used,  con- 
cerning the  taxation  of  property,  such  words  include  every- 
thing of  that  kind  not  expressly  or  by  necessary  implication 
excepted. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  153  Mo..  157. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  183 

54.  Land,  the  title  to  which  is  in  the  Government,  is  not 
subject  to  taxation  by  the  county  or  State. 

Moore  vs.  Woodruff,  146  Mo.,  597. 

55.  The  property  of  a  county  or  city,  which  is  exempt 
from  taxation,  is  that  which  is  owned  by  such  county  or  city. 
The  exemption  does  not  include  property  held  in  trust  by  such 
county  or  city,  and  such  property  may  be  taxed  under  the 
general  law. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Wenneker;  145  Mo.,  230. 

56.  The  buildings  erected  by  a  lessee,  upon  real  estate 
which  is  exempt  from  taxation,  as  belonging  to  a  charitable  or- 
ganization, are  subject  to  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mission  Free  School,  162  Mo.,  332. 

57  Statutory  exemptions  from  taxation,  in  favor  of  chari- 
table institutions,  cannot  be  added  to  exemptions  granted  by 
special  charter. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mission  Free  School,  162  Mo.,  332. 

58.  The  Constitution,  in  express    terms,    exempts    from 
taxation,  the  property  of  the  State,  the  county  and  other  mu- 
nicipal corporations,  and  cemeteries.    As  to  property  "used  ex- 
clusively for  purposes  purely  charitable, ' '  it  provides  that  such 
property  may  be  exempted. 

Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

59.  In  the  construction  of  laws,  exempting  property  from 
taxation,  it  is  a  cardinal  principle  that  they  must  be  strictly  con- 
strued,   and   it   devolves   upon   the   person   claiming  that  any 
specific  property  is  exempt,  to  show  it  beyond  a  reasonable 

doubt. 

Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

60.  The  property  of  charitable  organizations  is  not  exempt 
from  taxation,  unless  it  is  exclusively  used  for  purposes  purely 
charitable.     And  the  organization  attempting  to  show  that  it 
is  exempt  on  these  grounds,  must  show  that  it  is  a  charitable 
organization,  and  that  its  tenants,  also,  are  such. 

Adelphia  Lodge  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  356. 

61.  Masonic  lodges  are  charitable  institutions  within  the 
meaning  of  section  7504,  R.  S.  1889,  but  the  property  of  such 


184  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

lodges  is  exempt  from  taxation  when  used  exclusively  and  solely 
for  lodge  purposes.  And  when  a  part  of  the  building  is  rented 
for  other  purposes,  and  a  part  used  for  lodge  purposes,  the 
entire  property  is  subject  to  taxation. 

Fitterer  vs.  Crawford,  157  Mo.,  51. 

62.  The  property  of  a  telegraph  company  in  a  state,  is 
subject  to  state  taxation  like  other  property.     The  fact  that 
the  company  is  engaged  in  inter-state  commerce,  or  that  it  is 
an  agent  of  the  Government,  can  afford  no  immunity  from  the 
taxation  of  its  property. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Western  Union  Telegraph  Company, 
165  Mo.,  502. 

63.  The  franchise  which  the  Western  Union  Telegraph 
Company  derived  from  the  Act  of  Congress,  makes  that  com- 
pany a  governmental  agent  and  gives  it     the  right  to  enter 
any  state  in  the  union  and  transact  business  therein,  and  no 
state  has  authority  to  prevent  this.    But  the  Act  of  Congress 
does  not  exempt  the  tangible  property  of  said  company  from 
taxation  by  a  state  in  which  such  property  is  located. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Western  Union  Telegraph  Company, 
165  Mo.,  502. 


INJUNCTION— WHEN    THE    REMEDY   WILL    LIE,    AND 
WHEN  IT  WILL  NOT. 

1.  An  injunction  will  not  usually  lie  at  the  instance  of  the 
tax-payer  to  restrain  the  county  court  from  levying  a  tax. 

The  bill  must  show  that  the  damages  will  be  irreparable, 
or  such  as  cannot  be  redressed  by  a  law  action. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  32  Mo.,  496. 

2.  An  injunction  will  not  lie  to  restrain  an  officer  from  col- 
lecting taxes   which   have   been   irregularly   and   fraudulently 
levied. 

Barrow  vs.  Davis,  46  Mo.,  394. 

3.  Where  a  county  court  subscribed  for  stock  of  a  railroad 
company  before  the  articles  of  associations  have  been  executed. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  185 

or  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  State,  and  the  court  afterwards 
orders  a  tax  levy  to  meet  such  subscription  and  the  tax-payer 
pays  the  taxes  under  such  order,  such  taxes  cannot  be  recovered 
back. 

The  remedy  of  the  tax-payer  is  by  injunction. 

Ritbey  vs.  Shain,  54  Mo.,  207. 

4.  The  State,  through  its  Attorney-General  or  circuit  at- 
torney, or  any  tax-payer  of  a  municipality,  may  institute  a  pro- 
ceeding by  injunction  against  a  municipality  to  prevent  illegal 
action  by  it  in  attempting  to  increase  the  rate  of  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Saline  County  Court,  51  Mo.,  350. 
Newmeyer  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  52  Mo.,  81. 
Matthis  vs.  Town  of  Cameron,  62  Mo.,  504. 

5.  An  injunction  is  the  proper  remedy  to  prevent  the  col- 
lection of  a  tax   levied  in   excess  of  the  legal   limit;   but   the 
court  should  require  payment  of  the  taxes  confessedly  before 
granting  the  writ. 

Overall  vs.  Ruenzi,  67  Mo.,  203. 

6.  Injunction  will  not  lie  against  the  Board  of  Education 
to  prevent  the  collection  of  a  tax  levied  by  the  board,  when  the 
validity  of  the  tax  is  questioned  on  the  ground  that  the  board 
had  no  corporate  existence. 

Ewing  vs.  Board  of  Education,  72  Mo.,  436. 

7.  "Where  a  cloud  will  be  cast  on  the  title  of  land  by  reason: 
of  the  sale  thereof  for  taxes,  injunction  will  lie. 

Lockwood  vs.  St.  Louis,  24  Mo.,  20. 
Fowler  vs.  St.  Joseph,  37  Mo.,  228. 
Leslie  vs.  St.  Louis,  47  Mo.,  474. 
Bank  vs.  City  of  Kansas,  73  Mo.,  431. 
McPike  vs.  Pen,  51  Mo.,  63. 


8.    A 


' cloud  upon  title'1  refers  only  to  real  estate. 

Lockwood  vs.  St.  Louis,  24  Mo.,  20. 
Leslie  vs.  St.  Louis,  47  Mo.,  474. 
Warrensburg  vs.  Miller,  77  Mo.,  56. 
Sayre  vs.  Tompkins,  23  Mo.,  443. 
Bank  vs.  Kansas  City,  73  Mo.,  555. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wood,  155  Mo.,  425. 


186  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 

9.  An  injunction  will  not  be  granted  to  restrain  the  col- 
lection of  taxes  on  personal  property. 

Lockwood  vs.  St.  Louis,  24  Mo.,  20. 
Fowler  vs.  St.  Louis,  37  Mo.,  228. 
Leslie  vs.  St.  Louis,  47  Mo.,  474. 

10.  It  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  reconcile  the  au- 
thorities of  this  State,  in  regard  to  granting  injunctive  relief 
to  restrain  the  collection  of  taxes,  illegally  assessed  against  per- 
sonal property. 

Railroad  vs.  Lowder,  138  Mo.,  533. 

11.  Injunctive  relief  to  prevent  the  collection  of  taxes,  as- 
sessed on  personal  property  should  never  be  granted,  if  at  all, 
except  to  avoid  a  multiplicity  of  suits  or  under  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances. 

Railroad  vs.  Lowder,  138  Mo.,  533. 

12.  The  collection  of  a  personal  tax  will  not  be  enjoined 
upon  the  ground  that  the  law  authorizing  the  tax  is  unconsti- 
tutional. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wood,  155  Mo.,  425. 

13.  A  court  has  no  jurisdiction  to  enjoin  the  collection  of 
a  personal  tax  or  fee,  when  the  bill  shows  no  ground  for  appre- 
hension that  the  officer  will  enforce  the  collection  against  the 
complainant's  property. 

Sta4:e  ex  rel.  vs.  Wood,  155  Mo.,  425. 

14.  Injunction  will  not  lie  to  stay  the  collection  of  an 
erroneous  tax,  where  the  tax-payer  fails  to  appeal  to  the  Board 
of  Appeals  for  correction  of  errors  in  the  assessment. 

Deane  vs.  Todd,  22  Mo.,  go. 

15.  A  tax  based  on  an  assessment  made  after  the  date 
when  the  tax  became  payable,  is  not,  on  that  account,  subject 
to  be  enjoined. 

Railroad  vs.  Gracey,  126  Mo.,  472. 

16.  A  threatened  sale,  for  taxes,  of  non-taxable  property 
'will  be  restrained  by  injunction. 

Valle  vs.  Zeig-ler,  84  Mo.,  214. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  187 

17.  The  threatened  sale  of  land  for  illegal  taxes  will  be 
enjoined. 

North  St.  Louis  Gymnastic  Society  vs.  Hudson,  85 

Mo.,  32. 
North  St.  Louis  Gymnastic  Society  vs.  Hudson,  12 

A.  342. 

18.  Irregularities  in  the  estimates  returned  by  school  dis- 
tricts in  failing  to  mention  the  amount  of  the  several  funds 
which  the  levy  would  produce,  and  irregularities  in  computing 
the  average  rate  of  taxation  for  school  buildings,  sinking  fund 
and  annual  interest,  are  cured  by  the  statute  and  do  not  consti- 
tute ground  for  enjoining  the  collection  of  the  tax. 

Railroad  vs.  Gracey,  126  Mo.,  472. 

19.  Where  the  complainant's  bill  fails  to  show  that  the 
collection  of  a  personal  tax  will  be  enforced  against  property, 
a  court  of  equity  is  without  jurisdiction  to  restrain  the  col- 
lection. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Wood,  155  Mo.,  497. 

20.  Injunction  will  lie  on  behalf  of  the  tax-payer  to  re- 
strain illegal  diversion  of  public  funds. 

Black  vs.  Ross,  37  App.,  250. 

21.  Such  suit  may  be  instituted  by  any  tax-payer  by  him- 
self or  on  behalf  of  all  others  similarly  situated. 

Denison  vs.  Kansas  City,  95  Mo.,  416. 

22.  Mere  irregularities  in  the  assessment  or  levy  of  taxes, 
furnish  no  ground  for  relief  by  injunction. 

Railroad  vs.  Gracey,  126  Mo.,  472. 

23.  Injunction  will  lie  to  prevent  the  collection  of  taxes 
levied  without  authority. 

Railroad  vs.  Apperson,  97  Mo.,  300. 

24.  The  remedy  does  not  lie  when  the  assessment  was  il- 
legal and  void. 

Sayre  vs.  Tompkins,  23  Mo.,  443. 

25.  An  injunction  will  not  be  granted  to  restrain  a  county 
court  from  levying  a  tax  on  the  ground  that  the  court  had  no 


188.  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lai^s. 

jurisdiction,  nor  if  it  does  not  appear  that  the  injury  to  the 
tax-payer  would  be  irreparable. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  32  Mo.,  496. 
Sayre  vs.  Tompkins,  23  Mo.,  443. 

26.  A  tax  based  on  the  assessment  made  after  the  date  when 
the  tax  was  payable  is  not  on  that  account  subject  to  the  in- 
junctive  remedy. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Gracey,  126  Mo.,  472. 
Daris  vs.  Rosenblatt,  6  Mo.,  601. 

27.  Nor  will  an  injunction  lie  unless  the  circumstances  are 
such  that  irreparable  injury  will  be  wrought. 

Bank  vs.  Meredith,  44  Mo.,  500. 

28.  The  collection  of  a  tax  which  is  unconstitutional  may 
be  enjoined  by  suit  on  behalf  of  the  State  at  the  relation  of  the 
prosecuting  attorney. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Town  of  Columbia,  in  Mo.,  365. 

29.  Injunction  will  lie  where  taxes  are  assessed  in  excess 
of  the  legal  limit;  but  in  such  case  the  court  will  require  the 
payment  of  the  taxes  confessedly  due. 

Overall  vs.  Ruenzi,  67  Mo.,  203. 
Dickhaus  vs.  Olderheide,  22  App.,  76. 
Arnold  vs.  Hawkins,  95  Mo.,  569. 
Johnson  vs.  Duer,  115  Mo.,  366. 
Burham  vs.  Rogers,  167  Mo.,  17. 

30.  If  the  assessment  is  erroneous  and  the  party  assessed 
has  failed  to  make  his  complaint  to  the  court  of  appeals,  sitting 
for  the  correction  of  errors  in  assessments,  injunction  will  not 
lie. 

Deane  vs.  Todd,  22  Mo.,  90. 

31.  Injunction  will  lie  to  prevent  the  sale  of  real  estate  for 
taxes,  the  levy  of  which  is  prohibited  by  law. 

Bank  vs.  Kansas  City,  73  Mo.,  555. 

32.  Sections  9133  and  9190,  E.  S.  1889,  providing  that  one 
feeling  aggrieved  by  an  assessment  may  appeal  from  the  assess- 
ment and  the  county  board  of  equalization,  gives  a  remedy  at 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  189 

law  for  such  grievance  and  an  action    will  not  lie  to  enjoin  a 
collection  of  the  tax. 

Unionville  vs.  Staat,  155  Mo.,  55. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Neosho,   120  Mo.,  161. 
Meyer  vs.  Rosenblatt,  78  Mo.,  495. 
Potosi  vs.  Casey,  27  Mo.,  372. 

33.  'Where  the  collector  seizes  the  property  of  a  tax-payer, 
because  of  the  refusal  of  a  tax-payer  to  pay  an  invalid  assess- 
ment and  threatens  to  sell  the  same,  such  collector  will  be  re- 
strained by  injunction,  and  his  solvency  or  insolvency  is  imma- 
terial. 

Noll  vs.  Morgan,  82  App.,  112. 

34.  A  collector  assessing  property  under  a  void  levy,  can- 
not be  enjoined  from  enforcing  the  collection  of  taxes  there- 
under. 

In  such  cases,  he  is  a  trespasser  and  the  injured  party  has 
ample  remedy  at  law. 

Sayre  vs.  Tompkins,  23  Mo.,  443. 
Barrow  vs.  Davis,  46  Mo.,  394. 
Hopkins  vs.  Lovell,  47  Mo.,  102. 
McPike  vs.  Pugh,  48  Mo.,  525. 

35.  Injunction  will  lie  to  prevent  the  violation  of  an  agree- 
ment between  the  county  court  and  a  tax-payer,  where  the  col- 
lector was  about  to  enforce  the  collection  of  such  taxes,  con- 
trary to  such  agreement. 

Railroad  vs.  Anthony,  73  Mo.,  431. 

36.  Injunction  will  lie  to  prevent  the  levying  of  taxes  for 
the  payment  of  bonds  issued  under  the  act  of  March  23,  1868. 
(Acts  1868,  page  92.) 

Webb  vs.  Lafayette  County,  67  Mo.,  353. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Brassfield,  67  Mo.,  331. 
Harris  vs.  Dowis,  75  Mo.,  250. 

37.  If  discrimination  exists  in  the  taxation  of  property,  the 
party  discriminated  against  has  the  right  to  enjoin  the  collec- 
tion of  such  portion  of  the  tax  as  is  unjust. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co.,  165 
Mo.,  ^02. 


190  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

38.     Where  the  directors  of  the  school  have  lawfully  as- 
sessed a  tax,  the  collection  thereof  will  not  be  enjoined,  because 
such  directors  have  failed  to  perform  other  official  duties. 
Burnham  vs.  Rogers,   167  Mo.,  17. 


JUDGMENTS. 

1.  A  personal  judgment  against  the  owner  of  land  is  un- 
authorized, in  a  suit  to  enforce  the  State's  lien. 

The  judgment  must  be  special  and  against  the  land. 

Milner  vs.  Shipley,  94  Mo.,  106. 
Mosely  vs.  Reily,  126  Mo.,  124. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Taylor,  56  Mo.,  492. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Snyder,  139  Mo.,  549. 

2.  A  personal  judgment  cannot  be  entered  against  the  own- 
er, even  where  there  is  personal  sendee. 

Stewart  vs.  Allison,  150  Mo.,  343. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Snyder,  139  Mo.,  549. 

3.  A  personal  judgment  may  be  rendered    for   personal 
taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Snyder,  139  Mo.,  549. 

4.  The  true  owner  is  not  bound  by  a  tax  judgment,  where 
he  was  known,  and  not  made  a  party  to  the  suit;  but  if  un- 
known, and  the  proceedings  were  against  the  record  owner, 
he  is  bound. 

Evans  vs.  Robberson,  92  Mo.,  192. 

5.  A  judgment  rendered  against  one  who  is  ignorant  of 
the  suit  and  pays  the  taxes,  pendente  lite,  is  void. 

It  is  void  even  as  to  costs  of  suit,  and  all  subsequent  pro- 
ceedings after  the  payment  are  void. 

City  of  Aurora  vs.  Lindsay,  146  Mo.,  509. 

6.  A  tax  judgment  may  be  invalid  as  to  one  defendant, 
and  valid  as  to  others,  and  vice  versa. 

Williams  vs.  Hudson,  93  Mo.,  524. 
Neenan  vs.  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  89. 
Railroad  vs.  View,  156  Mo.,  608. 
Stevenson  vs.  Black,  168  Mo.,  549. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  191 

7.  Under  the  law  of  1872,  a  tax  judgment  is  void  where  the 
collector's  oath  is  omitted  from  the  delinquent  tax  list. 

Duff  vs.  Neilson,  90  Mo.,  93. 

8.  A  judgment  rendered  against  a  dead  man  is  void. 

Williams  vs.  Hudson,  93  Mo.,  524. 
Graves  vs.  Ewart,  99  Mo.,  13. 

9.  If  the  petition  fails  to  describe  the  land  attempted  to  be 
charged  with  the  tax  lien,  the  judgment  is  void  and  subject  to 
collateral  attack. 

Vaughan  vs.  Daniels,  98  Mo.,  230. 

10.  The  judgments  of  circuit  courts  in  tax  suits  are  con- 
clusive that  the  assessment  was  regular. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hunter,  98  Mo.,  386. 

11.  One  who  acquired  title  to  land  by  holding  adversely  to 
the  record  owner  is  not  affected  by  judgment  against  such  owner. 

Bartlett  vs.  Kauder,  97  Mo.,  356. 

12.  Under  the  law  of  1872  it  was  essential  to  the  validity 
of  a  tax  sale,  that  the  judgment  should  describe  the  land  and 
the  manner  in  which  notice  of  the  application  for  judgment  was 
given. 

Kinney  vs.  Forsythe,  96  Mo.,  414. 

13.  Under  the  Jaw  of  1.872,  unless  cause  for  postponement  be 
shown,  judgment  for  taxes  should  be  applied  for  at  the  July 
term  of  the  county  court. 

And  if  entered  at  a  subsequent  term,  the  judgment  is  void 
in  the  absence  of  recitals  showing  cause  for  postponement. 
Kinney  vs.  Forsythe,  96  Mo.,  414. 

14.  A  tax  judgment  of  a  circuit  court  is  conclusive  in  a 
collateral  proceeding  as  to  the  validity  of  the  assessment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hunter,  98  Mo.,  386. 
Allen  vs.  Ray,  96  Mo.,  542. 

15.  A  tax  judgment  may  be  impeached  by  the  petition  and 
order  of  publication. 

Milner  vs.  Shipley,  94  Mo.,  106. 


192  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

16.  A  tax  judgment  is  void  if  rendered  against  any  other 
Jand  than  that  described  in  the  petition. 

Milner  vs.  Shipley,  94  Mo.,  106. 

17.  The  owner  of  land,  when  served  by  publication,  may, 
within  three  years  thereafter,  have  the  tax  judgment  reviewed, 
and  for  cause,  set  aside. 

Jones  vs.  Driskill,  94  Mo.,  190. 

18.  Under  the  law  of  1887,  page  384,  a  judgment  cannot  be 
attacked  collaterally  by  showing  that  taxes  for  certain  years, 
included  in  the  judgment,  had  been  paid. 

Jones  vs.  Driskill,  94  Mo.,  190. 

19.  The  recitals  in  a  judgment  are  not  conclusive  as  to 
matters  appearing  in  the  judgment  roll. 

Blodgett  vs.  Schaffer,  94  Mo.,  652. 

20.  The  general  rule  as  to  presumptions  in  favor  of  judg- 
ments, and  other  legal  proceedings,  is  applicable  to  tax  judg- 
ments. 

Allen  vs.  McCabe,  93  Mo.,  138. 
Brown  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  262. 

21.  A  judgment  for  taxes  will  not  be  affected  in  a  collat- 
eral proceeding  by  the  fact  that  the  order  of  publication  omitted 
to  name  one  of  the  years  for  which  taxes  were  due. 

Williams  vs.  Hudson,  93  Mo.,  524. 

22.  Latent  ambiguities  in  the  description  of  the  land,  in 
u  judgment,  execution  and  tax  deed,  may  be  aided  by  oral  evi- 
dence. 

Brown  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  262. 

23.  Where  the  legality  of  a  tax  was  settled  by  a  judgment 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  the  question  cannot  afterwards  be  re- 
opened. 

Pitkin  vs.  Schacklett,   117  Mo.,  547. 

24.  If  it  is  alleged  in  the  petition  or  in  an  affidavit  filed 
therewith,  that  the  defendant  is  a  non-resident,  an  order  of  pub- 
lication should  be  based  on  such  allegation  or  affidavit. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  193 

If  such  order  is  not  made,  and  the  clerk  issue  a  summons, 
and  a  non  est  return  is  made  thereon,  and  the  order  of  pub- 
lication is  based  on  that,  the  judgment  is  void. 
Harness  vs.  Cravens,  126  Mo.,  233. 

25.  It  is  proper  to  include  attorneys'  fees  in  a  tax  judg- 
ment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Edwards,  144  Mo.,  467. 

26.  If  the  court  had  jurisdiction  of  the  subject-matter,  and 
of  the  defendant,  its  judgment  is  valid. 

A  sale  thereunder  should  not  be  set  aside  for  irregularities 
before  judgment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Boyd,  128  Mo.,  130. 

27.  The  omission  of  the  dollar  mark  from  a  tabular  state- 
ment in  a  judgment  is  immaterial  where  the  aggregate  amount 
of  the  taxes,  interest  and  costs,  in  dollars  and  cents,  is  recited 
in  the  judgment. 

Coombs  vs.  Crabtree,  105  Mo.,  292. 

28.  The  failure  of  the  assessor  to  verify  the  assessment 
books,  will  not  invalidate  a  sale  made  under  tax  judgment. 

Boyd  vs,  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

29.  One  who  buys  with  notice  of  a  tax  judgment  is  not  an 
innocent  purchaser. 

Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

30.  A  judgment  for  taxes  does  not  expire  within  three 
years. 

Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 
Fleckenstein  vs.  Baxter,  114  Mo.,  493. 

31.  A  tax  judgment  is  special  and  does  not  constitute  a 
lien  on  any  other  property  than  that  against  which  the  taxes  are 
assessed. 

Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

32.  Where  the  defendant  appears  and  defends  on  the  mer- 
its, he  is  bound  by  the  judgment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Burr,  143  Mo.,  209. 

n-13 


194  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

33.  A  judgment  of  a  circuit  court  in  a  suit  to  enforce  the 
lien  for  back  taxes,  is  conclusive  as  to  all  matters  that  may 
have  been  shown  in  defense  of  the  action  and  cannot  be  at- 
tacked collaterally. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hunter,  98  Mo.,  386. 
Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 
Stevenson  vs.  Black,  168  Mo.,  549. 

34.  A  judgment  should  charge  each  separate  tract  of  land 
with  the  amount  of  taxes  due  thereon.     It  is  improper  to  ren- 
der a  single  judgment  against  several  parcels  of  land  collec- 
tively. 

Each  tract  or  lot  is  chargeable  with  a  distinct  sum,  and 
one  tract  or  lot  cannot  be  made  to  answer  for  the  taxes  due 
on  another. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Kerr,  8  App.,  125. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bridge  Company,  73  Mo.,  449. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Finn,  100  Mo.,  429. 

35.  A  judgment  which  specifies  the  amount  of  taxes,  inter- 
est and  other  charges  due  upon  each  piece  of  land,  described 
therein,  and  declaring  the  taxes  found  due,  "a  special  lien  and 
judgment  against  said  tract  of  land  respectively"  is  sufficient. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hunter,  98  Mo.,  386. 

36.  A  judgment  in  a  tax  suit  may  refer  to  other  parts  of 
the  record  for  particulars. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hunter,  98  Mo.,  386. 

37.  Where  the  amount  of  taxes  due  at  the  beginning  of 
a  suit  are  stated  in  the  petition,  the  fact  that  the  judgment  in- 
cludes interest  and  costs,  does  not  invalidate  the  judgment. 

The  amount  of  the  judgment,  in  such  cases,  is  a  matter  of 
law,  and  not  of  fact. 

Kansas  City  vs.  St.  Joseph,  78  Mo.,  661. 

38.  A  tax  judgment  binds  those  who  are   made    parties 
thereto. 

Stafford  vs.  Fizer,  82  Mo.,  393. 

39.  A  tax  deed  is  of  no  validity  against  one  who  has  ac- 
quired title  to  land  by  adverse  possession,  and  is  in  possession 
thereof,  unless  he  was  made  a  party  to  the  tax  suit. 

Watt  vs.  Donnell,  80  Mo.,  195. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  195 

40.  A  judgment  for  taxes  against  the  unknown  heirs  of 
a  deceased  person,  will  not  divest  the  life  estate  of  the  widow. 

Berlien  vs.  Bieler,  96  Mo.,  491. 

41.  The  validity  of  a  judgment  rendered  in  a  tax  suit  can- 
not be  raised  collaterally,  because  of  the  want  of  sufficient  alle- 
gations in  the  petition. 

Wellshear  vs.  Kelley,  69  Mo.,  343. 

42.  The  objection  that  the  amount  of  a  judgment  is  in  ex- 
cess of  the  amount  of  taxes  stated  in  the  order  of  publication, 
can  only  be  made  by  timely  motion  directed  against  the  judg- 
ment, and  cannot  be  raised  collaterally. 

Allen  vs.  Ray,  96  Mo.,  542. 

43.  Judgments  cannot  be  rendered  against  land  for  taxes 
due  on  personal  property. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Powell,  44  Mo.,  436. 

44.  The  State  has  no  statutory  lien  upon  personal  prop- 
erty for  taxes  assessed  against  the  owner  thereof. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rowse,  49  Mo.,  586. 

45.  Although  the  State  has  no  express  lien  on  personal 
property  for  taxes,  it  has  an  equitable  lien  that  will  prevail 
over  the  claims  of  other  creditors. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rowse,  49  Mo.,  586. 
Greeley  vs.  Savings  Bank,  98  Mo.,  458. 

46.  A  judgment  against  a  tract  of  land,  which  was  not 
described  in  the  order  of  publication,  is  void. 

Stewart  vs.  Allison,  150  Mo.,  343. 

47.  If  the  judgment  describes  one  tract  of  land,  and  the 
order  of  publication  another,  the  description  in  the  order  of 
publication  will  control. 

Stewart  vs.  Allison,  150  Mo.,  343. 

48.  If  the  owner  of  property  is  advised  that  no  suit  for 
taxes  has  been  filed,  and  pays  his  delinquent  taxes,  the  lien  is 
discharged  and  the  judgment  thereafter  rendered  is  void. 

City  of  Aurora  vs.  Lindsay,  146  Mo.,  509. 


196  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

49.  If  a  curator  fails  to  pay  taxes  on  the  personal  property 
of  his  ward,  a  personal  judgment  may  be  rendered  against  him 
therefor. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Simpson,  90  App.,  50. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Burr.  143  Mo.,  209. 

50.  Where  the  judgment  is  for  plaintiff,  it  should  be  en- 
tered for  the  amount  shown  to  be  due  on  the  face  of  the  tax- 
bill  as  interest,  in  the  form  and  to  the  effect  prescribed  by  sec- 
tion 7683,  E.  S.  1889. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Edwards,  151  Mo.,  472. 

51.  If  publication  is  properly  made  against  a  non-resident 
owner  of  real  estate,  a  judgment  rendered  in  pursuance  thereof 
is  binding  on  him. 

This  is  true,  although  a  resident  defendant  in  the  same  suit 
was  not  served  with  process. 

Stevenson  vs.  Black,  168  Mo.,  509. 

52.  A  judgment  for  taxes,  when  brought  against  the  proper 
parties,  is  conclusive  of  the  question  as  to  the  amount  of  taxes 
due,  the  regularity  of  the  assessment,  and  the  correctness  of  the 
certificate  of  the  collector.    It  is  not  open  to  collateral  attack. 

Railroad  vs.  View,  156  Mo.,  608. 
Stevenson  vs.  Black,  168  Mo.,  549. 

53.  Where  there  is  regular  process  against  a  part  of  the 
defendants  in  a  tax  suit,  and  judgment  rendered  against  them, 
the  sheriff's  sale  thereunder  conveys  only  their  interest. 

Stevenson  vs.  Black,  168  Mo.,  549. 

54.  A  judgment  for  taxes  may  be  set  aside  at  a  subsequent 
term  of  court,  for  want  of  sufficient  notice. 

Schiffman  vs.  Schmidt,  154  Mo.,  204. 

55.  A  judgment  against  a  county,  or  its  regular  represen- 
tative, respecting  the  levy  and  collection  of  a  tax,  is  binding 
on  all  the  citizens  of  the  county. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rainey,  74  Mo.,  229. 

56.  One  who  is  sued  by  his  wrong  name;  but  who  appears 
and  defends,  is  bound  by  the  judgment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Burr,  143  Mo.,  209. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  197 

57.  If  the  proceedings  are  against  Siemson,  and  the  name 
of  the  owner  is  Simonson,  the  judgment  is  void. 

Simonson  vs.  Dolan,   114  Mo.,  176. 

58.  As  against  collateral  attack,    a   judgment   for   taxes 
against  Jeff.  M.  Thompson  is  good  against  Jeff  Thompson. 

A  judgment  against  Jeff  Thompson  would  be  good  as  against 
Jeff  M.  Thompson. 

Nolan  vs.  Taylor,  131  Mo.,  224. 

59.  Unless  it  appears  from  the  records  that  judgment  is 
void  it  is  not  subject  to  collateral  attack. 

Myers  vs.  McRay,  114  Mo.,  377. 

60.  Where  the  service  was  by  a  regular  publication,  the 
judgment  thereunder  cannot  be  collaterally  attacked  as  against 
an  innocent  purchaser. 

Schmidt  vs.  Neimeyer,  100  Mo.,  207. 

61.  Although  a  judgment  for  taxes  does  not  attempt  to 
charge  each  quarter  section  of  land  with  its  appropriate  part 
of  taxes  due,  this  irregularity  is  not  sufficient  to  invalidate  a 
judgment  in  a  collateral  proceeding. 

Cruzen  vs.  Stephens,  123  Mo.,  337. 

62.  A  judgment  in  a  suit  for  taxes  is  one  strictly  in  rem. 

Neenan  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  126  Mo.,  89. 
Allen  vs.  McCabe,  93  Mo.,  138. 

63.  Where  an  action  was  for  delinquent  taxes  for  two 
years,  and  the  evidence  shows  only  a  legal  assessment  for  one 
year,  the  judgment  should  be  rendered  for  the  taxes  due  for 
that  year  only. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phillips,  102  Mo.,  664. 

64.  Judgments  of  circuit  courts  are  as  conclusive  in  tax 
suits  as  in  other  cases  over  which  such  courts  have  jurisdiction-. 

Jones  vs.  Driskill,  94  Mo.,  190. 
Milner  vs.  Shipley,  94  Mo.,  106. 
Hill  vs.  Sherwood,  96  Mo.,  125. 
Allen  vs.  McCabe,  93  Mo.,  138. 
Gibbs  vs.  Southern,  116  Mo.,  204. 


198  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 

65.  Where  a  judgment  for  taxes  on  constructive  service 
is  in  excess  of  the  sum  asked  for  in  the  petition,  such  judgment 
should  he  set  aside  on  motion  made  for  that  purpose. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Davidson,  87  Mo.,  683. 

66.  A  tax  judgment  is  not  void  hecause  each  tract  of  land 
is  not  specially  charged  with  the  items  of  taxes  applicable  to  it. 

Curzen  vs.  Stephens,  123  Mo.,  337. 

67.  Although  the  judgment  in  a  back-tax  suit  was  ren- 
dered against  all  of  a  number  of  lots  for  the  taxes  due,  such 
fact  cannot  be  shown  for  the  purpose  of  impeaching  the  judg- 
ment. 

Brown  vs.   Walker,   n   App.,  226. 
Brown  vs.  Walker,  85  Mo.,  262. 

68.  Where  taxes,  although  illegally  levied  have  been  paid, 
judgment  should  not  be  rendered  against  the  defendant  for 
penalties  and  attorney's  fee. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Trust  Company,  68  Mo.,  463. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  71  Mo.,  88. 

69.  A  judgment  for  taxes  in  excess  of  the  sum  asked  for  in 
the  petition  should  be  set  aside  on  motion. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Davidson,  87  Mo.,  683. 


JURISDICTION. 

1.  The  Supreme  Court  has  appellate  jurisdiction  in  cases 
involving  the  construction  of  the  State  revenue  laws. 

Morrow  vs.  Surber,  97  Mo.,  155. 

Railroad  vs.  Gracy,  126  Mo.,  472. 

Hilton  vs.  Smith,  134  Mo.,  499. 

City  of  Stanberry  vs.  Jordan,  145  Mo.,  371. 

City  of  Hannibal  vs.  Bowman,  167  Mo.,  535. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Angert,  53  App.,  349. 

Moore  vs.  Vaughan,  53  App.,  632. 

2.  The  constitutional  phrase  "involving  the  construction 
of  the  revenue  laws ' '  is  not  synonymous  with  * '  questions  affect- 
ing the  revenue." 

State  ex  rel  vs.  Tittmann,  31  App.,  82. 
State  vs.  Sneed,  88  Mo.,  138. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  199 

3.     Justices  of  the  peace  have  no  jurisdiction  of  actions  to 
enforce  the  State 's  lien  for  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Staley,  76  Mo.,  158. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hopkins,  87  Mo.,  519. 


LEGISLATURE. 

1.  Primarily  the  Legislature  is  vested  with  the  power  to 
levy  taxes,  either  general  or  special. 

Grading  Company  vs.  Holden,  107  Mo.,  305. 

2.  The  General  Assembly  has  control  over  the  revenues 
of  a  city  as  well  as  over  those  of  the  counties  and  State. 

It  may  direct  that  the  expenses  of  an  election  of  school  di- 
rectors in  a  city  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  city's  revenues. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Board  of  Education,  141  Mo.,  45. 

3.  The  Legislature  may  confer  power  upon  a  municipality 
to  collect  an  ad  valorem  tax  on  property  used  in  a  calling  and 
also  to  impose  a  license  tax  upon  the  pursuit  of  that  calling. 

Springfield  vs.  Smith,  138  Mo.,  645. 

4.  The  taxing  power  belongs  to  the  Legislature  and  is  sub- 
ject to  no  restrictions  or  limitations  except  the  Constitution  of 
the  State  and  the  United  States. 

Railroad  vs.  Board  of  Equalization,  64  Mo.,  294. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Springer,  134  Mo.,  212. 

5.  The  power  of  taxation  is  a  sovereign  right  belonging  to 
the  State,  and  which  can  only  be  exercised  in  pursuance  of  laws 
passed  by  the  Legislature. 

State  vs.  Shortridge,  56  Mo.,  126. 

6.  The  Legislature  has  full  power  and  control  over  the 
subject  of  taxation. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Savings  Bank,  49  Mo.,  574. 

7.  The  Legislature  may  repeal  a  temporary  rate  of  taxa- 
tion and  impose  a  higher  or  additional  rate. 

Winters  vs.  Railroad,  39  Mo.,  476. 
Railroad  vs.  Dtille  et  al,  48  Mo.,  282. 


200  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

8.  The  Legislature  may  authorize  or  direct  the  levying 
of  taxes  to  pay  a  pre-existing  debt. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Clemens,  52  Mo.,  133. 

9.  The  Legislature  alone  has  the  power  to  provide  the  man- 
ner of  assessment  of  property  for  taxation. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Wenneker,  145  Mo.,  230. 

10.  Although  the  Legislature  has  omitted  certain  property 
form  taxation,  the  judiciary  of  the  State  cannot  direct  how  it 
shall  be  taxed. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Building  and  Loan  Association,  145 
Mo..  50. 

11.  The  General  Assembly  may  levy,  for  public  purposes, 
a  succession  or  devolution  tax  under  the  Missouri  Inheritance 
Laws  and  statutes  of  wills. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Switzler,  143  Mo.,  287. 

12.  The  Legislature  may  impose  a  tax  upon  a  municipal- 
ity of  this  State,  when  in  its  judgment  it  is  for  the  benefit  of  that 
locality  as  well  as  for  the  State  at  large. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mason,  153  Mo.,  23. 

13.  The  Legislature  has  control  of  municipal  organizations 
and  may  authorize  them  to  levy  taxes  and  issue  bonds  to  meet 
public  improvements. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  County  Court,  44  Mo.,  504. 


LICENSES-GENERALLY. 

1.  The  license  fees  which  are  imposed  on  those  who  pur- 
sue particular  employments,  are  taxes. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

2.  When  the  purpose  of  an  ordinance  is  to  raise  revenue  by 
the  assessment  of  a  license  fee,  such  license  fee  is  a  tax  and 
must  conform  to  the  constitutional  requirement  that  taxes  " shall 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  201 

be  uniform  upon  the  same  class  of  subjects  within  the  terri- 
torial limits  of  the  authority  levying  the  taxes." 

Kansas  City  vs.  Crush,  151  Mo.,  129. 
St.  Louis  vs.  Spiegel,  75  Mo.,  145. 
St.  Louis  vs.  Spiegel,  90  Mo.,  587. 

3.  A  city  cannot  impose  a  license  tax  on  any  business, 
vocation  or  calling,  unless  the  same  be  especially  named  as  tax- 
able in  its  charter. 

Kansas  City  vs.  -Crush,  151  Mo.,  128. 

4.  The  Constitution  enjoins  a  uniform  rule  as  to  the  impo- 
sition of  taxes  on  property,  but  it  does  not  abridge  the  power 
of  the  Legislature  to  provide  revenue  from  other  sources. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  47  Mo.,  479. 

5.  The  right  to  license  an  employment  does  not  imply  the 
right  to  charge  a  license  therefor  with  a  view  to  revenue. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Insurance  &  Trust  Co.,  47  Mo., 
150. 

6.  A  license  is  issued  under  the  police  power  and  will  usu- 
ally be  limited  to  such  charges  as  will  cover  the  necessary  ex- 
penses of  issuing  it  and  the  additional  labor  of  the  officers  and 
the  expenses  thereby  imposed. 

The  exaction  of  a  license  fee  with  a  view  to  revenue,  would 
be  an  exercise  of  the  taxing  power,  and  unless  the  charter  of  a 
city  plainly  shows  an  intent  to  confer  the  power  of  taxation,  a 
municipal  corporation  cannot  assume  it. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Insurance  &  Trust  Co.,  47  Mo., 
"  150. 

7.  The  omission  of  the  county  court  to  levy  a  tax  upon 
licenses,  when  making  a  general  levy,  does  not  extinguish  their 
authority  to  make  a  levy  therefor  subsequently. 

.State  ex  rel.  vs.  Maguire,  52  Mo.,  420. 

8.  "When  a  tax  is  levied  on  a  license,  it  constitutes  an  in- 
cumb ranee  upon  it,  and  the  proper  time  to  collect  the  same  is 
at  or  before  the  delivery  of  the  license. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Maguire,  52  Mo.,  420. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Spencer,  49  Mo.,  342. , 


202  Digest  of  the  Revenue  La-ivs. 

9.  A  municipality  may  not  impose  a  tax  lien  upon  property 
without  express  charter  authority. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Starke,  93  App.,  70. 

10.  The  constitutional  provisions  of  uniformity  of  taxation 
does  not  apply  to  privilege  or  occupation  taxes. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Richardson,  90  App.,  450. 

11.  The  council  of  a  municipal  corporation  cannot,  by  defi- 
nition enlarge  its  power,  and  the  meaning  of  words  must  remain 
a  question  for  the  courts. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Butt,  88  App.,  237. 

12.  Where  an  occupation  is  taxed  merely  to  regulate  it, 
this  is  the  exercise  of  the  police  power. 

But  if  the  object  is  to  produce  revenue,  it  must  be  referred 
to  the  taxing  power. 

City  of  Lamar  vs.  Adams,  90  App.,  35. 

13.  Where  a  county  court  makes  an  order  requiring  li- 
censes and  assessing  a  tax  therefor,  before  the  statute  author- 
izing it  goes  into  effect,  such  order  is  null. 

Neff  vs.  Maguire,  52  Mo.,  493. 

14.  A  right  to  license  implies  a  right  to  prohibit. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Ferry  Co.,  14  App.,  216. 
Carroll  vs.  Campbell,  25  App.,  630. 

15.  Where  a  city  charter  does  not  exclude  the  right  of  the 
county  court  to  demand  a  license,  a  license  from  the  city  or 
town  will  not  relieve  from  the  obligation  to  obtain  a  county 
license. 

State  vs.  Harper,  58  Mo.,  530. 
Harrison  vs.  State,  9  Mo.,  530. 

16.  Although  a  license  is  a  mere  privilege  it  is  yet  so  far 
within  the  protection  of  the  law  that  it  cannot  be  abrogated 
without  sufficient  cause. 

State  vs.  Baker,  32  App.,  98. 

17.  A  municipal  occupation  license  tax  is  not  a  contract 
within  the  protection  of  State  or  Federal  Constitution. 

St.  Charles  vs.  Hackman,  133  Mo.,  634. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  203 

18.  An  occupation  tax  does  not  create  a  contractual  rela- 
tion between  the  municipal  corporation  and  the  licensee  so  as 
to  absolutely  require  the  corporation  to  permit  the  occupation 
for  the  whole  period  of  the  license. 

The  corporation  in  the  exercise  of  its  police  power,  may 
prohibit  the  occupation  during  the  currency  of  the  term  of  the 
license,  without  thereby  impairing  a  contractual  obligation  of 
the  city. 

St.  Charles  vs.  Hackman,  133  Mo.,  634. 

19.  The  tax  imposed  upon  a  merchant  by  the  charter  of 
Kansas  City,  is  not  for  the  purpose  of  exercising  the  privilege 
of  selling  goods;  but  it  is  a  tax  imposed  upon  his  goods  and 
wares.     It  is  a  personal  tax. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Johnson,  78  Mo.,  661. 

20.  A  State  law  requiring  an  importer  of  foreign  goods, 
who  sells  the  same  in  the  original  unbroken  package,  to  take  out 
a  license  from  the  State,  would  be  unconstitutional. 

State  vs.  North,  27  Mo.,  464. 

21.  Property  taxed  for  revenue  may  also  be  subjected  to 
a  license  tax. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Bircher,  7  App.,  169. 

22.  It  is  competent  to  impose  a  license  on  each  occupation 
pursued. 

vSt.  Louis  vs.  Weitzel,   130  Mo.,  602. 

23.  The  city  of  St.  Louis,  under  its  charter  powers,  may 
levy  these  taxes:  a  tax  on  property;  a  vehicle  tax  for  the  use  of 
streets;  a  tax  on  business  or  occupations. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Weitzel,  130  Mo.,  600. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Green,  7  App..  468. 

St.   Louis  vs.   Sternberg-,  69  Mo.,  302. 

24.  Where  a  municipality  has  power  to  tax  callings,  trades 
and  professions,  and  taxes  persons  engaged  in  the  same  busi- 
ness alike,  such  taxation  is  equal  and  uniform. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Sternberg,  69  Mo.,  290. 
Express  Co.  vs.  St.  Joseph,  66  Mo.,  675. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Bowler,  94  Mo.,  630. 


204  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

25.  Chapter  89  of  the  Eevised  Statutes  of  Missouri  of  1879, 
confers  no  power  on  a  village  incorporated  thereunder  to  im- 
pose a  license  tax  for  the  privilege  of  keeping  a  public  scale. 

Knox  City  vs.  White,  19  App.,  528. 

26.  In  granting  a  license,  a  city  has  no  authority  to  adopt 
the  credit  system. 

The  money  should  be  paid  before  the  delivery  of  the  license 
or  at  least  concurrently  with  its  delivery. 

City  of  Craig  vs.  Smith,  31  App.,  286. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Spencer,  49  Mo.,  342. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Maguire,  52  Mo.,  420. 

27.  Although  a  license  granted  by  a  municipal  corpora- 
tion is  a  mere  privilege,  yet  it  is  so  far  within  the  protection 
of  the  law,  that  it  cannot  be  abrogated  without  sufficient  cause. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Baker,  32  App.,  98. 

28.  So  long  as  goods   imported   into    one  of   the   United 
States  from  a  foreign  country,  remains  in  the  original  unbroken 
package,  the  importer  may  sell  the  same  in  that  form  without 
license. 

A  statute  requiring  him  to  first  take  out  a  license  would 
be  in  conflict  with  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 
State  vs.  Shapleigh,  27  Mo.,  344. 

29.  Where  a  special  provision  is  applicable  to  a  particular 
locality  and  is  inconsistent  with  a  general  law,  the  former  must 
prevail,  therefore,  the  charter  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  as  amended 
and  approved,  March  4,  1870,  authorized  said  city  to  regulate 
or  suppress  houses  of  ill  fame. 

State  vs.  DeBar,  58  Mo.,  395. 

30.  Cities  of  the  second  class  have  authority  under  the 
statute  to  require  a  licensed  coal  dealer  to  weigh  his  coal  on 
the  public  scales  and  exact  a  charge  therefor. 

City  of  St.  Charles  vs.  Eisner,  155  Mo.,  671. 

31.  A  city  of  the  second  class  may  collect  a  revenue  tax 
both  by  way  of  license  and  a  tax  on  the  net  income  of  foreign 
insurance  companies. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.'  Ernst,  95  Mo.,  360. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  205 

32.  The  duty  of  issuing  a  merchant  license  under  the  city 
charter  is  ministerial  and  its  performance  may  be  compelled  by 
mandamus. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ashbrook,  154  Mo.,  375. 

33.  The  power  to  license  may  imply  the  power  to  tax. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.  Ernst,  95  Mo.,  360. 

34.  The  act  of  .1825  and  supplements  thereto,  passed  in 
1829  are  constitutional,  in  so  far  as  they  impose  a  tax  on  retail 
dealers. 

Tracy  vs.  The  State,  3  Mo.,  3. 

35.  The  State  may  collect  an  ad  valorem  tax  on  property 
used  in  a  calling  and  at  the  same  time  impose  a  license  tax  upon 
the  pursuit  of  that  calling. 

The  State  may  confer  such  power  upon  a  municipality  and 
a  city  may  exercise  the  right  as  a  police  regulation  to  raise 
revenue. 

A  license  tax  of  $10.00  may  be  imposed  by  a  city  upon  each 
car  used  by  a  railway  company. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Smith,  138  Mo.,  645. 

36.  The  constitutional  guarantee  of  the  enjoyment  of  the 
gains  of  one's  own  industry,  is  not  an  absolute  right;  but  it  is 
subordinate  to  the  police  powers  of  the  city. 

It  makes  no  difference  in  particular  if  the  tax  is  against  the 
occupation  and  not  against  the  property. 

St.  Louis  vs.  McCann,  157  Mo.,  301. 

37.  In  determining  what  constitutes  the  income  and  reve- 
nue provided  for  one  year  within  the  meaning  of  section  23, 
article  10  of  the  Constitution,  income  raised  from  licenses,  should 
be  estimated. 

Lamar  W.  E.  L.  Co.  vs.  the  City  of  Lamar,   128 
Mo.,  188. 

38.  Pursuits  that  are  pernicious  and  detrimental  to  public 
morals  may  be  prohibited  altogether. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 

39.  The  franchise  of  a  foreign  corporation,  doing  business 
under  the  laws  of  this  State,  is  property  and  subject  to  taxa- 


206  •  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

tion;  either  directly  in  proportion  that  the  portion  of  the  fran- 
chise exercised  in  this  State  bears  to  the  proportion  of  the  fran- 
chise exercised  by  the  corporation  in  all  states;  or  indirectly 
by  being  impressed  upon  the  tangible  property  owned  by  it  in 
Missouri,  according  to  its  proportionate  value  to  the  whole  prop- 
erty constituting  the  system. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Western  Union  Telegraph  Co.,  165 
Mo..  516. 

40.  The  Legislature  has  power  to  tax  all  professions  and 
to  delegate  that  authority. 

Simmons  vs.  State,  12  Mo.,  268. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Langhlin,  49  Mo.,  559. 

Express  Co.  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  66  Mo.,  675. 

ARCHITECTS. 

1.  The  city  of  St.  Louis  has  power  to  impose  a  license  tax 
upon  architects. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Herthel,  14  App.,  467. 
St.  Louis  vs.  Herthel,  88  Mo.,  128. 

AUCTIONEERS. 

1.  A  licensed  auctioneer  cannot  delegate  his  authority. 

Stone  vs.  State,  12  Mo.,  401. 

2.  Although  one  receives  no  compensation  for  exercising 
the  trade  of  an  auctioneer,  he  should  take  out  a  license. 

State  vs.  Rucker,  24  Mo.,  557. 

BANKS. 

1.  Savings  banks,  incorporated  under  chapter  68,  G.  S. 
1865,  are  liable  to  be  taxed  on  their  capital  and  property. 

They  are  not  required  to  take  out  a  license  as  brokers. 
State  vs.  Field,  49  Mo.,  270. 

2.  A  state  has  no  power  to  authorize  taxation  of  national 
banks,  except  on  the  shares  of  the  banks. 

Nor  can  it  authorize  municipalities  to  exact  license  taxes 
from  such  banks  doing  business  within  the  limits  of  such  munic- 
ipalities. 

Carthage  vs.  Bank,  71  Mo.,  508. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  207 

BOATS. 

1.  A  license  fee  being  a  tax  within  the  meaning  of  the  Con- 
stitution requiring  all  taxes  to  be  uniform  upon  the  same  class 
of  property,  the  boats  of  a  foreign  corporation  must  be  taxed 
the  same  as  those  belonging  to  resident  owners  in  the  city  of 
St.  Louis.     This,  without  regard  to  the  situs  of  the  foreign  boats. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Coal  Co.,  113  Mo.,  83. 

2.  An  ordinance  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  providing  a  li- 
cense on  tugs  and  barges,  and  authorizing  a  reduction  of  forty 
per  cent,  of  the  regular  rates,  in  favor  of  vessels  owned  by 
residents  of  St.  Louis,  and  taxable  there,  is  unconstitutional. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Coal  Co.,  113  Mo.,  83. 

DRAMSHOPS. 

1.  The  State  has  the  right  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  intoxi- 
cating liquors  without  a  license. 

State  vs.  Lemp,  16  Mo.,  389. 
State  vs.  Searcy,  20  Mo.,  489. 
Austin  vs.  State,  10  Mo.,  591. 

2.  Where  the  power  is  given  to  a  city  to  tax  and  restrain 
the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  such  power  includes  the  author- 
ity to  grant  licenses. 

Schweitzer  vs.  City  of  Liberty,  82  Mo.,  309. 

3.  Under  the  acts  of  1&83,  the  license  fee  exacted  from 
dramshop  keepers  is  not  a  tax. 

It  is  a  price  paid  for  a  privilege. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 

4.  Under  the  act  of  1883,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  county 
courts  of  the  counties  and  the  municipal  assembly  of  St.  Louis, 
to  fix  the  amount  of  licenses  that  is  required  of  dramshop  keepers. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 

5.  Under  the  law  of  1855,  K.  C.,  page  686,  towns  could  not 
levy  a  tax  for  dramshop  licenses,  greater  than  that  levied  for 
State  purposes. 

Town  of  Paris  vs.  Graham,  33  Mo.,  94. 

State  vs.  Lemp,  16  Mo.,  389. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hudson,  78  Mo.,  302. 


208  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

6.  The  exclusive  power  of  granting  licenses  to  sell  liquor 
is  vested  in  the  county  court. 

State  vs.  Evans,  83  Mo.,  319. 
Austin  vs.  State,  10  Mo.,  591. 

7.  It  has  long  been  the  established  law  in  this  State,  that 
the  right  to  sell  spiritous  or  intoxicating  liquors  is  not  a  natural 
right. 

It  is  a  calling  which  no  one  has  a  right  to  pursue  without 
first  having  procured  a  license  so  to  do. 

State  vs.  Bixman,  162  Mo.,  I. 

8.  A  dramshop  license  is  not  a  contract. 
It  is  a  mere  permit. 

The  licensee  has  no  vested  rights  thereunder  and  it  is  sub- 
ject to  the  police  powers  of  the  State  government,  and  may  be 
revoked  at  any  time. 

Higgins  vs.  Talty,  157  Mo.,  280. 

DENTISTS. 

1.  A  statute  permitting  cities  to  license  dentists  is  valid. 

State  ex  rel.  vs..  Fisher,  1 19  Mo.,  344. 

2.  A  dentist  is  not  a  practitioner  of  medicines  or  surgery  in 
any  of  their  departments/as  defined  in  section  6771,  E.  S.  1889. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Fisher,  119  Mo.,  344. 

DOGS. 

1.  A  city  may,  by  proper  ordinance,  impose  a  per  capita 
tax  on  dogs  by  way  of  license. 

Such  tax  is  an  exercise  of  the  police  power  of  the  city,  and 
is  not  prohibited  by  the  Constitution. 

City  of  Carthage  vs.  Rhodes,  101  Mo.,  175. 

ENGINEERS. 

1.  An  ordinance  passed  by  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  in  pur- 
suance of  its  charter  assessing  a  fine  against  any  company  em- 
ploying an  unlicensed  engineer,  is  not  unconstitutional. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Manufacturing  Company,  139  Mo.,  560. 


Digest:  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  209 

HOTELS. 

1.     The  city  of  St.  Louis  has  the  power  to  require  licenses 
from  hotel  and  boarding  house  keepers. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Bircher,  7  App.,  169. 
St.  Louis  vs.  Bircher,  76  Mo.,  431. 

INSURANCE  COMPANIES. 

1.  Cities  of  the  third  class  have  power  to  require  a  license 
tax  of  foreign  insurance  companies  for  the  privilege  of  carry- 
ing on  their  business  within  the  limits  of  such  city. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Hubble,  89  App.,  379. 

2.  This  right  is  not  taken  away  by  the  act  of  1895,  now 
section  8043. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Hubble,  89  App.,  379. 

3.  The  general  law,  incorporating  cities  of  the  second  class, 
expressly  authorizes  a  city  organized  thereunder  to  license  carry- 
ing on  of  the  business  of  insurance,  within  its  limits. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.  Ernst,  95  Mo.,  360. 

4.  Cities  of  the  fourth  class  have  power  to  levy  and  col- 
lect a  license  tax  on  insurance  companies  and  insurance  agents 
doing  business  in  the  city. 

City  of  Farmington  vs.  Rutherford,  94  App.,  328. 
City  of  Lamar  vs.  Adams,  90  App.,  35. 

LAWYERS. 

1.  It  is  not  necessary  that  there  should  be  property  be- 
fore a  tax  can  be  levied. 

Lawyers  may  be  compelled  to  pay  a  license  for  practicing 
their  profession. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

2.  The  State  has  the  right  to  tax  lawyers  and  others  en- 
gaged in  professional  life,  and  to  delegate  that  right. 

Simmons  vs.  State,  12  Mo.,  271. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Steinburg,  69  Mo.,  289. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Laughlin,  49  Mo.,  559. 


D— 14 


210  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

3.  An  ordinance  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis  imposing  a  tax 
of  $25.00  a  year  on  every  lawyer  of  the  city,  without  reference 
to  the  amount  of  his  practice,  is  not  obnoxious  to  the  consti- 
tutional provision  requiring  that  taxation  shall  be  uniform. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Sternberg,  69  Mo.,  289. 

4.  A  city  has  no  right  to  compel  an  attorney  to  pay  a 
tax  before  he  can  pursue  his  professional  employment,  unless 
there  is  a  grant  in  its  charter  conferring  the  power. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Laughlin,  49  Mo.,  559. 

MERCHANTS. 

1.  One  engaged  in  buying  and  selling  potatoes,  apples  and 
vegetables  of  all  kinds,  and  who  has  some  fixed  place  of  busi- 
ness, is  a  merchant. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Crush,  151  Mo.,  128. 

2.  It  is  immaterial  that  a  merchant  changes  the  form  of 
goods  sold. 

If  he  deals  in  selling  them  at  his  store,  stand  or  place,  he  is 
a  merchant. 

State  vs.  Whittaker,  33  Mo.,  457. 

3.  One  who  manufactures  and  supplies  goods  on  the  pre- 
vious orders  of  his  customers,  is  not  a  merchant  within  the  mean- 
ing of  the  law,  although  he  keeps  on  hand  the  materials  from 
which  the  articles  are  produced. 

He  is  a  manufacturer. 

State  vs.  West,  34  Mo.,  424. 

4.  One  who  manufactures  and  supplies  goods  on  the  pre- 
vious orders  of  his  customers  alone,  although  he  keeps  on  hand, 
but  not  for  sale,  the  materials  from  which  the  manufactured 
articles  are  produced,  is  not  a  merchant. 

.   State  vs.  Richeson,  45   Mo.,   575. 
State  vs.  West,  34  Mo.,  424. 

5.  A  dealer  in  drugs  and  medicines  is  a  merchant  within 
the  meaning  of  the  first  section  (Laws  1855)  of  the  act  to  tax 
and  license  merchants. 

State  vs.  Wells,  28  Mo.-,  565. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  211 

6.  Merchandise  is  not  listed  for  taxation  as  other  personal 
property,  but  the  merchant  must  apply  for  a  license  to  trade 
as  such. 

The  license  gives  the  merchant  the  right  to  engage  in  mer- 
cantile pursuits. 

The  tax  which  a  merchant  pays  on  his  goods  is  another  and 
different  thing. 

The  license  is  a  tax  upon  the  occupation,  the  personal  tax 
on  the  goods  is  one  upon  the  stock  in  trade,  and  is  a  personal 
property  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tracey,  94  Mo.,  217. 

7.  The  charter  of  the  City  of  Kansas  authorized  the  coun- 
cil to  license  merchants. 

This  power  authorizes  the  municipal  government  to  license 
dealers  in  every  kind  and  description  of  commercial  commodities. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Lorber,  64  App.,  604. 

8.  The  act  to  tax  and  license  merchants,  approved  Decem- 
ber 11,  1855,  does  not  require  the  importer  of  foreign  goods  to 
take  out  a  license  to  authorize  him  to  sell  the  same  in  the  orig- 
inal packages. 

State  vs.  Shapleigh,  27  Mo.,  344. 

9.  Cities  of  the  fourth  class  may  impose  a  license  on  mer- 
chants in  proportion  to  the  value  of  the  stock  owned  by  each. 

A  license  of  $2.00,  on  merchants  with  a  stock  of  less  than 
$1,000.00,  and  of  $3.00  on  merchants  with  a  greater  stock  is 
not  unconstitutional. 

Cities  of  the  fourth  class  may  levy  a  license  tax  upon  pur- 
suits or  callings,  and  at  the  same  time  collect  an  advalorem  tax 
upon  the  property  used  in  that  calling. 

City  of  Aurora  vs.  McGannon,  138  Mo.,  38. 

10.  The  act  of  1849,  imposing  a  tax  upon  merchants  and 
grocers  is  constitutional. 

Merchants  engaged  in  business  in  a  town  on  any  day  be- 
tween the  first  Monday  in  March  and  June,  must  file  the  state- 
ment required  by  section  8546,  R.  S.  1899. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Rodecker,  145  Mo.,  450. 


212  Digest  of  the  Revenue  -Lai^s. 

11.  The  charter  of  the  City  of  Kansas,  specifically  enu- 
merates merchants  as  being  among  the  persons  and  occupations 
to  be  licensed  by  said  city. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Vindquest,  36  App.,  584. 

12.  Taxes  may  be  collected  from  merchants  and  grocers, 
under  the  authority  of  the  act  of  1849. 

Crow  vs.  State,  14  Mo.,  239. 

13.  The  act  to  tax  and  license  merchants,  approved  De- 
cember 11,  1855  (B.  0.  1855),  in  so  far  as  the  same  requires 
merchants,  dealing  in  the  manufactures  of  sister  states,  to  take 
out  licenses  from  the  State,  and  to  pay  a  tax  on  the  same,  is 
unconstitutional. 

State  vs.  North,  27  Mo.,  464. 

14.  A  dealer  in  drugs  and  medicines,  is  a  merchant  within 
the  meaning  of  the  first  section  of  the  act  of  1855,  to  tax  and 
license  merchants. 

State  vs.  Wells,  28  Mo.,  565. 

15.  Under  the  charter  of  Kansas  City,  a  merchant's  lia- 
bility for  the  payment  of  taxes  for  a  given  year,  does  not  de- 
pend upon  the  fact  of  his  being  a  merchant  during  the  fiscal 
year,  beginning  on  the  third  Monday  of  April  of  that  year;  but 
it  depends  upon  the  fact  whether  upon  the  first  day  of  January 
of  that  year,  and  at  -any  time  within  three  months  before  such 
first  day  of  January,  he  had  on  hands,  as  a  merchant,  goods, 
wares  and  merchandise. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Johnson,  78  Mo.,  661. 

16.  The  tax  imposed  upon  a  merchant  by  the  charter  of 
Kansas  City  is  not  for  exercising  the  privilege  of  selling  goods. 

It  is  a  tax  imposed  upon  his  goods. 

It  is  a  persona]  tax  on  the  goods  of  a  merchant,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  personal  tax  of  others. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Johnson,  78  Mo.,  661. 

17.  The  third  section  of  W.  S.,  page  938,  imposed  an  in- 
direct tax  on  property  and  not  a  mere  ordinary  charge  for 
the  exercise  of  a  privilege. 

City  of  Cape  Girardeau  vs.  Riley,  72  Mo.,  220. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Las^s.  213 

18.  A  license  tax  of  one  per  cent,  per  annum  upon  the 
cash  value  of  the  goods,  wares  and  merchandise  imposed  by  a 
city  upon  merchants,  cannot  be  upheld  as  an  occupation  tax. 

It  is  a  plain  property  or  ad  valorem  tax,  and  being  in  excess 
of  the  limit  permitted  by  the  Constitution,  is  void. 

It  is  void  because  not  uniform  as  to  all  personal  property 
within  the  city. 

City  of  Brookfield  vs.  Tooey,  141  Mo.,  619. 

PEDDLERS. 

1.  Section  twelve,  of  the  code  of  1834,  page  429,  requires 
a  license  to  peddle  clocks,  whether  such  clocks  are  manufactured 
in  this  State  or  elsewhere. 

Page  vs.  State,  .6  Mo.,  203. 

2.  The  correct  interpretation  of  section  6472,  R.  S.  1879, 
is,  that  the  license  shall  be  issued  to  the  person  actually  using  it. 

The  doctrine  of  principal  and  agent  does  not  apply. 
State  vs.  Downing,  22  App.,  504. 

3.  One  going  from  place  to  place,  selling  medicine  and  de- 
livering same  at  the  time  and  place  of  sale,  is  a  peddler  witttin 
the  meaning  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  1889, -section  7211. 

State  vs.  Parsons,  124  Mo.,  436. 
State  vs.  Smithson,   106  Mo.,  149. 

4.  A  peddler  vending  single  bottles  of  medicine  manu- 
factured in  another  state,  and  which  were  taken  from  the  box 
in  which  several  bottles  were  separately  wrapped  and  shipped 
into  this  State,  cannot  invoke  the  commerce  clause  of  the  Federal 
Constitution  against  the  statutes  of  this  State,  defining  a  peddler 
and  imposing  a  license  on  the  vocation. 

State  vs.  Parson,  124  Mo.,  436. 

5.  One  who  goes  from  place  to  place  in  this  State,  offering 
for  sale  and  sells  machines  manufactured  in  another  state,  the 
property  of  a  citizen  of  the  latter  state,  is  a  peddler  within  the 
meaning  of  Revised  Statute  of  1889,  section  7211. 

State  vs.  Ernert,  103  Mo.,  241. 

6.  The  statutes  of  this  State,  defining  who  are  peddlers  and 
prohibiting  them  from  dealing  without  a  license,  make  no  dis- 


214  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 

tinction  between  articles  manufactured  and  owned  by  residents 
of  this  State  and  such  as  are  manufactured  and  owned  by  resi- 
dents of  other  states,  and  such  statutes  are  not  in  conflict  with 
section  1,  of  article  8,  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
delegating  to  Congress  the  whole  power  to  regulate  commerce 
among  the  states. 

State  vs.  Etnert,  103  Mo.,  241. 

7.  The  act  requiring  a  license  on  peddlers  is  not  in  con- 
travention of  the  State  or  Federal  Constitution. 

State  vs.  Smithson,  106  Mo.,  149. 

8.  The  statute  existing  in  1876,  in  reference  to  the  com- 
pulsion of  peddlers  to  pay  a  license,  was  unconstitutional. 

'  State  vs.  Browning,  62  Mo.,  591.     (Overruling  State 
vs.  Welton,  55  Mo.,  288.) 

9.  The  Act  of  1825,  imposing  a  tax  on  peddlers  in  so  far 
as  the  same  applies  to  the,  sale  of  merchandise  not  in  the  original 
package,  is  constitutional. 

Tracey  vs.  State,  3  Mo.,  3. 

10.  A  person  traveling  from  place  to  place  in  a  two  horse 
vehicle,  selling  wares,  is  a  peddler  and  should  obtain  a  license, 
though  his  wares  were  manufactured  by  him  in  this  State. 

State  vs.  Holmes,  62  App.,  178. 

PHYSICIANS. 

1.  Physicians  may  be  compelled  to  pay  a  license  for  prac- 
ticing their  profession. 

Glasgow  vs.  Rowse,  43  Mo.,  479. 

2.  The  statute  authorizing  cities  to  license  doctors  has  been 
sustained. 

State  vs.  Hathaway,  115  Mo.,  36. 

STEAM   LAUNDRIES. 

1.  The  statutes  of  this  State  do  not  authorize  cities  of  the 
third  class  to  levy  a  tax  on  steam  laundries. 

City  of  Independence  vs.  Cleveland,  167  Mo.,  384. 

2.  Nor  has  such  city  any  authority  to  impose  a  license  tax 
on  an  agent  of  any  such  laundry,  who  does  business  in  such 


Digest:  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  215 

city;  nor  can  it  fine  such  agent  for  doing  business  as  an  agent 
of  a  laundry  located  elsewhere. 

City  of  Independence  vs.  Cleveland,  167  Mo.,  384. 

3.  Cities  of  the  second  class  have  the  power  to  license  and 
tax  steam  laundries. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.  Lung,  93  App.,  626. 

TELEPHONE  COMPANIES. 

1.  Telephone  companies  are  ejusdem  generis  with  tele- 
graph companies  under  sub-division  5,  section  26,  article  3,  of 
the  charter  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  giving  the  mayor  and  as- 
sembly power  to  license  telegraph  companies  and  all  other  busi- 
ness trades,  vocations  and  professions. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Bell  Telephone  Company,  96 
'  Mo.,  623. 

VEHICLES. 

1.  An   ordinance   dividing  vehicles   and  teams  into   dif- 
ferent classes  and  imposing  an  occupation  tax  on  the  separate 
classes,  is  not  a  tax  on  personal  property,  but  is  in  the  nature 
of  a  privilege  connected  with  property  and  not  in  conflict  with 
the  constitutional  provision  requiring  all  property  to  be  taxed 
in  proportion  to  its  value. 

Kansas  City  vs.  Richardson,  90  App.,  450. 

2.  Where  the  charter  of  the  city  provides  that  it  may  im- 
pose a  tax  on  vehicles  for  street  use  and  also  a  tax  on  occupation, 
it  may  require  the  payment  of  a  license  tax  on  vehicles  used 
in  a  particular  occupation,  in  addition  to  that  imposed  for  street 
use. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Weitzel,  130  Mo.,  600. 

3.  The  city  of  St.  Charles  passed  an  ordinance  requiring 
a  license  tax  for  wagons  used  for  pay  and  attempted  to  impose 
a  tax  upon  wagons  of  persons  residing  outside  of  the  city  and 
engaged  in  hauling  into  and  out  of  the  city. 

The  ordinance  was  void. 

It  would  in  effect  have  been  taking  property  for  private 
use, 

St.  Charles  vs.  Nolle,  51  Mo.,  122. 


216  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

4.  Ordinance  No.  10494,  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  imposing 
a  license  tax  upon  vehicles  using  the  streets  of  the  city,  is  valid. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Green,  70  Mo.,  562. 

5.  The  city  of  St.  Louis,  under  its  charter,  has  power  to 
impose  and  by  criminal  prosecution    to  enforce  penalties  for 
violation  of  an  ordinance  exacting  a  license  from  vehicles  using 
the  streets  of  the  city. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Green,  6  App.  590. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Green,  7  App.,  468. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Green,  70  Mo.,  562. 
City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Sternberg,  69  Mo.,  289. 

6.  The  ordinance  of  St.  Louis  provided  that  "public  vehi- 
cles used  on  streets  of  the  city  for  trade  or  traffic  or  other 
purposes/'  should  pay  a  tax. 

One  engaged  in  the  business  of  sprinkling  the  streets  with 
water  for  compensation  paid  by  the  owners  of  the  property 
fronting  on  the  streets  and  using  tanks  mounted  on  wheels  and 
driven  through  the  streets,  was  liable  to  pay  the  license  tax. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Woodruff,  71  Mo.,  92. 

7.  A  city  may  require  a  license  plate  to  be  attached  to  a 
vehicle  for  use  in  a  particular  occupation,  notwithstanding  such 
vehicle  already  has  a  license  plate  for  street  use  attached,  and 
the  reasonable  expense  of  furnishing  such  special  license  plate 
may  be  charged. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Weitzel,   130  Mo.,  602. 

8.  A  statute  granting  the  power  to  license  and  regulate 
dram  shops,  public  shows,  theatricals  and  other  amusements, 
cannot  be  intended  to  include  the  power  of  licensing  wagons  run 
for  hire  by  virtue  of  a  general  clause  at  its  close,  granting  power 
to  pass  other  ordinances  for  police  regulations. 

Knox  City  vs.  Thompson,   19  App.,  523. 

9.  Police  powers  conferred  by  section  5110,  statutes  of 
1879,  cannot  be  used  for  the  purposes  of  revenue. 

An  ordinance,  therefore,  which  imposes  a  license  fee  of 
twenty-five  cents  per  wagon,  and  an  additional  license  of  $2.00 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  217 

for  each  six  months,  is  an  ordinance  for  revenue  purposes  and 
void. 

Knox  City  vs.  Thompson,  19  App.,  523. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Green,  7  App.,  468. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Insurance  &  Trust  Co.,  47  Mo.,  151. 

10,  A  power  granted  in  a  municipal  charter  to  "  license, 
tax,  and  regulate  street  railroads,  cars  and  companies,  hackney 
carriages,  omnibuses  and  all  other  vehicles,  and  all  other  busi- 
ness trades  whatever, "  does  not  empower  a  city  government 
to  impose  a  license  tax  on  vehicles  used  exclusively  for  private 
purposes. 

City  of  Hannibal  vs.  Price,  29  App.,  280. 


LIEN. 

1.  The  covenants  contained  in  the  words,  "  grant,  bargain 
and  sell,"  in  a  conveyance  of  land  is  a  covenant  against  the  in- 
cumbrances  caused  by  the  taxes  assessed  to  the  owner  of  land  at 
the  date  of  the  assessment. 

Blossom  vs.  Van  Court,  34  Mo.,  390. 

2.  State  and  county  taxes  constitute  a  lien  on  real  estate 
from  and  after  the  first  Monday  in  September  and  the  then  owner 
will  be  liable  to  subsequent  purchasers  on  his  covenant  of  war- 
ranty, even  though  the  sale  is  prior  to  the  assessment. 

McLaren  vs.  Sheble,  45  Mo.,  130. 

3.  For  the  payment  of  taxes  on  the  personal  property  of  a 
debtor,  the  State  has  an  equitable  lien  which  will  prevail  over 
the  claims  of  creditors. 

In  case  of  such  assignment,  the  collector  has  authority  under 
the  statute  to  assess  and  sell  the  property  in  the  hands  of  the 
assignee. 

State  vs.  Rowse,  49  Mo.,  586. 

4.  A  city  has  no  lien  for  taxes  and  no  power  to  impose 
penalties  for  non-payment  of  taxes  unless  given  by  the  charter. 

City  of  Jefferson  vs.  Whipple,  71  Mo.,  519. 


218  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

5.  Under  the  Laws  of  1872,  a  lien  was  created  for  city  taxes 
due  upon  real  property. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Shepherd,  74  Mo.,  310. 

6.  Under  the  Act  of  March  10,  1871,  providing  a  system  of 
assessing  and  collecting  taxes  on  railroads,  there  was  no  lien 
upon  the  property  of  the  company  for  the  taxes  due. 

State  vs.  Railway  Company,  77  Mo.,  202. 

7.  A  lien  of  the  State  for  taxes  on  realty  cannot  follow 
severed  fixtures  as  personal  property. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Goodnow,  80  Mo.,  271. 

8.  The  lien  of  the  State  for  taxes  is  superior  to  all  other 
liens,  whether  prior  or  subsequent. 

Stafford  vs.  Fizer,  82  Mo.,  393. 

9.  A  tax  lien  on  land  is  superior  to  one  created  by  a  trust 
cleed,  although  junior  thereto. 

Gitchell  vs.  Kreidler,  84  Mo.,  472. 

10.  The  statutory  lien  for  taxes,  under  the  Law  of  1877, 
held  enforcible  for  school  taxes,  duly  assessed  and  levied  under 
the  Act  of  1867,  although  not  entered  on  the  tax  book  by  the 
county  clerk  as  required  by  the  later  act. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Harper,  83  Mo.,  670. 

11.  The  lien  of  the  State  for  taxes  is  superior  to  all  other 

liens. 

Allen  vs.  McCabe,  93  Mo.,  138. 
Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

12.  The  State's  right  to  be  paid  taxes  due  it  on  property 
in  the  hands  of  a  receiver,  is  paramount  to  the  claim  of  other 

creditors. 

Greeley  vs.  Provident  Savings  Bank,  98  Mo.,  458. 

13.  A  tax  lien  is  not  merged  in  a  tax  judgment  so  as  to 
expire  in  a  general  judgment  lien  in  three  years. 

Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

14.  The  State's  lien  for  taxes  is  paramount  to  the  interest 
of  the  widow  in  her  deceased  husband 's  estate,  and  such  interest 
may  be  sold  for  the  payment  of  taxes. 

Rohrer  vs.  Oder,  124  Mo.,  24. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  219 

15.  No  lien  is  created  for  taxes  until  the  tax  is  levied  and 
extended  on  the  tax  book. 

City  of  Westport  vs.  McGee,  128  Mo.,  152. 

16.  Unpaid  taxes  constitute  a  prior  and  paramount  lien  to 
all  other  liens. 

A  tax  lien  is  declared  by  the  public  records  and  there  can 
be  no  innocent  purchaser  of  lands  without  notice  of  such  lien. 

A  tax  lien  is  not  merged  into  a  judgment  lien,  so  as  to  expire 
in  three  years,  and  in  case  of  a  general  judgment. 
Fleckenstein  vs.  Baxter,  114  Mo.,  493. 

17.  A  vendor,  having  a  lien  on  the  land  for  the  purchase 
money  may  pay  delinquent  taxes  thereon2  and  recover  the  same 
as  a  part  of  the  lien  debt. 

Brown  vs.  Brown,  124  Mo..  79. 

18.  A  tax  lien,  whether  prior  in  point  of  time  or  not,  to  a 
deed  of  trust,  is  a  superior  lien. 

Williams  vs.  Hudson,  93  Mo.,  524. 

19.  The  failure  of  the  collector  to  properly  return  the  de- 
linquent list,  or  of  the  county  court  to  collect  and  authenticate 
that  list,  will  not  impair  the  State's  lien  for  taxes  arising  from 
a  valid  assessment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hurt,  113  Mo.,  90. 


LIFE  TENANTS  AND  REMAINDER  MEN. 

1.  A  tenant  for  life  is  bound  to  pay  the  annual  taxes,  even 
though  holding  under  a  deed  which  purports  to  convey  title  in 
fee. 

Bone  vs.  Tyrrell,  113  Mo.,  175. 

2.  On  the  death  of  one  of  two  co-tenants,  it  is  the  duty  of  th.^ 
other  to  pay  the  taxes  for  the  current  year  against  the  common 
property. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  probate  court  to  allow  him  credit  for 
one-half  of  the  amount  so  paid  against  the  estate  of  the  deceased. 
Bates  vs.  Hamilton,  144  Mo.,  i. 


220  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

3.  It  being  the  duty  of  the  owner  of  the  life  tenant  in  this 
case  solely  to  pay  taxes  on  the  land,  there  is  no  forfeiture  of  the 
title  by  the  reversioner,  because  he  has  not  paid  taxes. 

Howeil  vs.  Jump,  140  Mo.,  442. 


LIMITATIONS. 

(General  Statute.) 

1.  The  general  statute  of  limitations  has  no  application  to 
the  demand  of  the  State  for  delinquent  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  Ellison  vs.  Piland,  81  Mo.,  519. 

2.  One  taking  possession  of  land  under  a  certificate  of  pur- 
chase issued  under  the  revenue  laws  of  1872,  before  the  receipt 
of  a  deed,  became  a  tresspasser. 

The  statute  of  limitations  would  run  in  his  favor  from  the 
date  of  his  entry. 

Parsons  vs.  Viets,  96  Mo.,  408. 

3.  A  void  tax  deed  may  constitute  color  of  title  under 
the  general  statute  of  limitations. 

Bartlett  vs.  Kauder,  97  Mo.,  356. 

4.  Statutes  of  limitations  do  not  apply  to  actions  brought 
by  the  State  unless  clearly  so  provided  by  law. 

The  short  limitation  found  in  the  Administration  Act  does 
not  apply  to  actions  brought  by  the  State  for  the  collection 
of  taxes. 

Nor  does  the  general  limitation  law  of  1879  apply  in  such 
case. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tittman,  119  Mo.,  661. 

5.  The  mere  payment  of  taxes  on  a  vacant  lot  will  not 
create  title  by  adverse  possession. 

Cashtnan  vs.  Cashman's  Heirs,  123  Mo.,  647. 

6.  The  right  to  recover  taxes  paid  by  the  holder  of  a  deed, 
being  incident  to  his  failure  to  recover  in  ejectment,  is  not  barred 
if  the  action  is  brought  in  the  alternative  and  within  ten  years 
from  the  date  of  the  deed. 

Zimmerman  vs.  Ry.  Co.,  156  Mo.,  561. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  221 

7.  Suit  for  taxes  may  be  brought  at  any  time  within  five 
years  after  the  tax  becomes  delinquent. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Fullerton,  143  Mo.,  682. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Edwards,  136  Mo.,  360. 

8.  The  five  years  statute  of  limitation  runs  against  a  special 

tax-bill. 

Connoyer  vs.  La  Beaume's  Heirs,  45  Mo.,  139. 

9.  The  two  years  limitations  contained  in  the  statute  re- 
lating to  the  treasury  department  (Wag.  Stat.  1326,  section  24), 
did  not  bar  an  action  against  the  State  Auditor  to  compel  the 
payment  of  that  portion  of  the  revenue  set  aside  annually  for 
the  purpose  of  the  State  university. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  State  Auditor,  60  Mo.,  596. 

10.  The  general  statute  of  limitation  does  not  run  against 
a  demand  of  the  State  for  State  taxes. 

Rosenblatt  vs.  Heman,  70  Mo.,  441. 

City  of  Jefferson  vs.  Whipple,  71  Mo.,  519. 

11.  An  action  on  a  special  tax-bill  issued  by  the  City  of 
St.  Louis  on  account  of  a  street  improvement  is  barred  by  the 
five  years  statute  of  limitations.  (Gen.  Stat.  1865,  chapter  191, 
section  10.) 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Newman,  45  Mo.,  138. 

12.  In  an  ordinary  suit  between  a  city^ind  an  individual 
against  whom  taxes  are  assessed,  the  plea  of  the  statute  is  a 
good  defense. 

City  of  Jefferson  vs.  Whipple,  71  Mo.,  519. 

SPECIAL    STATUTE. 
(Wag.  Stat.  Sec.  221,  p.  1207.) 

1.  The  special  three  years  statute  of  limitations  begins  to 
run  in  favor  of  a  legal  tax  deed  from  the  time  it  is  recorded. 

Skinner  vs.  Williams,  85  Mo.,  489. 

2.  It  did  not  run  in  favor  of  a  void  deed. 

Mason,  et  al  vs.  Crowder,  85  Mo.,  526. 
Hopkins  vs.  Scott,  86  Mo.,  140. 

3.  This  is  true  even  where  the  purchaser  takes  and  holds 
possession  under  the  deed. 

Callahan  vs.  Davis,  90  Mo.,  78. 


222  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

4.  A  tax  deed  void  on  its  face  will  not  set  the  special  stat- 
ute of  limitations  in  motion. 

Laws  of  1872,  W.  S.,  p.  1198,  Sec.  190. 
Duff  vs.  Neilson,  90  Mo.,  93. 
Kinney  vs.  Forsythe,  96  Mo.,  414. 

5.  Section  221,  2  W.  S.  1872,  p.  1267,  was  repealed  by  the 
revision  of  1879. 

Blodgett  vs.  Schaffer,  94  Mo.,  652. 

6.  Said  statute  is  of  no  avail  to  one  claiming  under  an  un- 
recorded tax  deed. 

Blodgett  vs.  Schaffer,  94  Mo.,  652. 

7.  Section  221,  p.  1207,  W.  S.,  has  no  application  to  a  tax 
deed  made  under  the  revenue  Act  of  1877. 

Bartlett  vs.  Kauder,  97  Mo.,  356. 

8.  Where  the  tax  sale  and  proceedings  are  regular  and  the 
deed  has  been  of  record  for  three  years,  the  special  statute  of 
limitations  is  a  complete  bar  to  the  right  of  the  owner  to  re- 
cover the  land. 

Allen  vs.  White,  98  Mo.,  55. 

9.  The  limitation  contained  in  section  221,  Acts  of  1872, 
did  not  run  in  favor  of  a  void  tax  deed. 

Pitkin  vs.  Reibel,  104  Mo.,  505. 

10.  A  tax  deed  valid  on  its  face  puts  the  special  statute  of 
limitations  in  opera'tion  from  the  time  of  its  being  recorded. 

11.  Where  the  statute  was  repealed  before  the  three  years 
had  run,  the  title  by  limitation  could  not  be  acquired  under  it. 

Bird  vs.  Sellers,  113  Mo.,  580. 

12.  It  did  not  apply  to  actions  brought  by  the  State  for  the 
collection  of  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tittman,  119  Mo.,  661. 

13.  Under  the  Laws  of  1872  the  statute  of  limitations  be- 
gins to  run  against  an  action  on  a  tax  deed  from  its  date. 

Taft  vs.  McCullock,  135  Mo.,  588. 

Under  the  Act  of  1895,  concerning  delinquent  personal  taxes, 
tax  suits  were  not  barred  but  could  be  brought  under  that  act  at 
any  time  before  January  1, 1896. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Edwards,  162  Mo.,  660. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laivs.  223- 


OFFICERS. 

1.  The  right  of  a  public  officer  cannot  be  created  by  con- 
tract, it  can  only  exist  as  a  creation  of  law. 

In  the  absence  of  constitutional  restrictions,  the  salary  of 
public  officers  may  be  increased  or  diminished  during  their  term 
of  office. 

The  manner  of  payment  may  be  changed,  or  the  basis  en- 
larged, without  the  impairment  of  any  vested  right. 

Givens  vs.  Daviess  County,  107  Mo.,  603. 

2.  The  penalty  provided  by  the  criminal  law,  for  the  misap- 
propriation of  county  funds,  is  not  a  substitute  for  any  civil 

remedy. 

Knox  County  vs.  Hunolt,  no  Mo.,  67. 

3.  In  order  to  justify  taking  any  steps  in  the  collection  of 
taxes,  the  officer  must  act  under  some  statute. 

The  uniform  doctrine  is,  that  statutes  creating  a  tax,  or  pro- 
viding for  their  assessment,  must  be  strictly  construed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  St.  Louis  County  Court,  13  App.,  53. 

4.  An  officer  intrusted  with  public  funds  and  his  sureties 
are  prima  facie  liable  for  balances  for  which  his  official  books 
show  him  indebted. 

Pundmann  vs.  Schoenich,  144  Mo.,  149. 


PARTIES  TO  TAX  SUITS. 

1.     Suits  for  taxes  should  be  brought  against  the  record 

owner. 

Vance  vs.  Corrigan,  78  Mo.,  94. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Sack,  79  Mo.,  661. 

Cowell  vs.  Gray,  85  Mo.,  169. 

Mining  Company  vs.  Zeitinger,  45   App.,  114. 

St.  Joseph  vs.  Baker,  86  App.,  310. 

Payne  vs.  Lott,  90  Mo.,  676. 

Evans  vs.  Robberson,  92  Mo.,  192. 

Troyer  vs.  Wood,  96  Mo.,  478. 

Allen  vs.  Ray,  96  Mo.;  542. 

Hilton  vs.  Smith,  134  Mo.,  498. 

Crane  vs.  Dameron,  98  Mo.,  567. 


224  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs. 

2.  The  law  requires  the  owner  of  land  to  be  made  a  party 
to  an  action  to  recover  taxes  due  thereon.     The  owner,  in  the 
absence  of  notice  to  the  contrary,  is  the  person  who  so  appears 
T>y  the  county  records. 

Nolan  vs.  Taylor,  131  Mo.3  224. 

3.  The  owner  of  ]and  in  contemplation  of  the  statute,  is  the 
actual  owner  if  known;  if  unknown,  the  owner  is  the  apparent 
owner  as  shown  by  the  records  of  land  title.    In  the  absence 
of  notice  that  any  person  is  in  fact  the  owner,  tax  suits  should 
be  brought  against  the  person  who  appears  from  the  record  of 
deeds  to  be  the  owner. 

Hunt  vs.  Sack,  79  Mo.,  661. 
Simonsen  vs.  Dolon,  114  Mo.,  176. 
Payne  vs.  Lott,  90  Mo.,  676. 

4.  The  owner  of  land  is  a  necessary  party  in  a  suit  to  en- 
force the  State's  lien  for  taxes,  even  though  the  action  be  one 
in  rein. 

Tooker  vs.  Leake,  146  Mo.,  419. 

5.  Reference  must  be  had  to  the  deed  records  and  not  to 
the  records  in  the  collector's  office    to    ascertain  who  is  the 
record  owner.    Reference  may  be  had  both  to  the  certified  plats 
of  the  United  States  land  office  on  file  in  the  office  of  the  county 
clerk,  and  also  to  the  deed  records. 

Payne  vs.  Lott,  90  Mo.,  676. 
Watt  vs.  Donnell,  80  Mo.,  195. 

6  The  law  of  1877  requires  that  tax  suits  must  be  brought 
against  the  owner  of  the  property,  and  the  collector  in  bringing 
the  suit,  and  the  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  must  take  notice  of  the 
record  of  deeds.  A  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale,  where  the  record 
owner  is  not  made  a  party,  gets  only  the  interest  of  the  de- 
fendants in  the  suit. 

Vance  vs.  Corrigan,  78  Mo.,  94. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Sack,  79  Mo.,  661. 
Cowell  vs.  Gray,  85  Mo.,  169. 
Evans  vs.  Robberson,  92  Mo.,  192. 
Payne  vs.  Lott,  90  Mo.,  676. 
Allen  vs.  Ray,  96  Mo.,  542. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  225 

7.  Suits  for  railroad  taxes,  under  the  Act  of  1871,  are 
properly  brought  in  the  name  of  the  county. 

Livingston  County  vs.  Railroad,  60  Mo.,  516. 

8.  The  sheriff  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis  was  the  proper  person 
to  bring  an  action  for  the  collection  of  taxes  under  the  law  as 
it  existed  in  1876. 

Webster  vs.  Smith,  13  App.,  323. 

9.  It  is  not  necessary  to  make  persons  defendants    who 
have  acquired  interest  in  the  land  subsequent  to  the  assessment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Miller,  16  App.,  539. 

10.  If  the  remainder  men  are  not  made  parties,  this  will 
not  make  the  judgment  void. 

Hogan  vs.  Smith,  n  App.,  314. 

11.  In  a  suit  to  enjoin  the  collector  from  collecting  taxes 
levied  to  pay  interest  on  alleged  illegal  bonds  issued  to  a  rail- 
road company,  the  county  court  that  issued  the  bonds  and  levied 
the  tax,  and  the  railroad  company,  should  be  made  parties 
thereto. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Sanderson,  54  Mo.,  203. 

12.  The  trustee  in  a  deed  of  trust  need  not  be  made  a 
party  to  a  suit  for  the  enforcement  of  the  collection  of  taxes. 

Keating  vs.  Craig,  73  Mo.,  507. 

13.  Since  the  passage  of  the  revenue  law  of  1872,  the  city 
of  Hannibal  has  no  right  to  enforce  the  lien  for  taxes  in  her  own 
name.     The  lien  must  be  enforced  by  suit  in  the  name  of  the 
State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Van  Every,  75  Mo.,  530. 

14.  In  a  suit  to  enforce  a  lien  for  taxes,  the  holder  of  an 
inferior  encumbrance  should  be  made  a  party. 

Stafford  vs.  Fizer,  82  Mo.,  393. 

15.  The  cestui  que  trust,  in  a  trust  deed  of  record,  should 
be  made  a  party. 

Cowell  vs.  Gray,  85  Mo.,  169. 

n— is 


226  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs. 

16.  One  who  has  obtained  title  to  land  by  holding  adverse 
possession  thereto,  against  the  record  owner,  should  be  made 
defendant.    If  not,  his  title  will  not  be  affected. 

Watt  vs.  Donnell,  80  Mo.,  195. 

17.  A  wife's  interest  and  her  separate  real  estate  is  not 
affected  by  a  tax  suit  against  her  husband. 

Gitchell  vs.  Messmer,  87  Mo.,  131. 

18.  Under  the  charter  of  the  City  of  Kansas,  a  proceeding 
to  enforce  a  lien  for  taxes, due  on  land,  should  be  brought  against 
all  persons  having  an  interest  in  the  land  at  the  commencement 
of  the  suit. 

City  of  Kansas  City  vs.  Railroad,  77  Mo.,  180. 

19.  All  officers  upon  whom  the  law  imposes  a  duty  in  re- 
gard to  the  collection  of  revenue,  may  well  be  made  parties 
defendant  in  a  suit  brought  to  enjoin  illegal  proceedings  for  the 
collection  of  taxes. 

Railroad  vs.  Anthony,  73  Mo.,  432. 

20.  The  assignee  of  a  note,  secured  by  deed  of  trust  on  real 
estate,  is  a  necessary  party  to  a  suit  to  enforce  the  tax  lien. 

Bank  vs.  Grewe,  84  Mo.,  478. 

21.  Where  the  proceedings  are  brought  against  a  dead 
man,  the  judgment  is  void. 

WiHiams  vs.  Hudson,  93  Mo..  524. 

22.  A  suit  for  taxes  against  the  "unknown  heirs"  of  a 
deceased  person  will  not  divest  the  life  estate  of  the  widow. 

Berlien  vs.  Bieler,  96  Mo.,  491. 

23.  Suits  for  delinquent  taxes,  under  the  law  of  1872,  in 
cities  containing  less  than  five  thousand  inhabitants,  must  be 
brought  in  the  name  of  the  State  to  the  use  of  the  county  col- 
lector. 

State  to  use  vs.  Robyn,  93  Mo.,  395. 

24.  Under  the  law  as  it  existed  in  1879,  the  city  collector, 
in  cities  of  over  five  thousand  inhabitants,  was  the  proper  per- 
son to  bring  a  suit  in  the  name  of  the  State  for  back  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Hamilton,  04  Mo.,  544. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  227 

25.  Collectors  were  without  authority,  by  the  Act  of  1872, 
to  institute  suits  for  taxes  against  railroads,  after  the  expira 
tion  of  their  term  of  office.    They  were  authorized  to  continue 
the  prosecution  of  suits  begun  by  them. 

Gordon  vs.  Lafayette  County,  74  Mo.,  426. 

26.  Where  a  widow  was  not  made  a  party  to  a  tax  suit, 
the  sale  of  the  land  does  not  bar  her  right  to  dower. 

Blevins  vs.  Smith,  104  Mo.,  583. 

27.  An  heir  who  was  not  made  a  party  to  a  tax  proceed- 
ing to  sell  his  decedents  lands,  may  recover  his  aliquoit  part 
thereof  in  a  suit  brought  to  recover  the  whole  tract. 

Walcott  vs.^iand,  122  Mo.,  621. 

28.  The  State  is  the  real  party  interested  in  a  tax  suit  and 
it  is  not  necessary,  when  a  collector  retires  from  office,  to  make 
liis  successor  a  party.    The  suit  may  be  continued  in  the  style 
commenced. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  S'anford,  127  Mo.,  368. 

29.  A  mistake  in  the  letter  of  a  name,  where  the  correct 
parties  are  before  the  court,  does  not  affect  the  validity  of  the 
proceedings. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Burr,  143  Mo.,  209. 

30.  Where  a  petition  was  against  the  "unknown  heirs/' 
and  the  title  was  in  fact  in  certain  devisees,  a  sale  under  such 
a  proceeding  does  not  affect  the  interest  of  such  devisees. 

Hartman  vs.  Hornsby,  142  Mo.,  368. 

31.  The  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  can  obtain  no  interest  in 
the  property  sold,  except  the  right,  title  and  interest  of  such 
parties  as  are  made  defendants. 

Moore  vs.  Woodruff,  146  Mo.,  597. 

32.  The  remedy  provided  by  the  laws  of  1897,  page  219, 
for  the  collection  of  taxes  due  the  city  of  St.  Louis,  does  not 
impair  the  right  of  the  collector  to  maintain  an  action  therefor 
in  the  name  of  the  State. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cummings,  151  Mo.,  49. 

33.  Suits  for  delinquent  city  taxes,  accruing  during  the 
years  1891,  1892  and  1893,  should  be  brought  in  the  name  of 


228  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

the  city  at  the  relation  of  the  city  collector;  and  not  in  the  name 
of  the  State,  at  the  relation  of  the  county  collector. 

City  of  Aurora  vs.  Lindsay,  146  Mo.,  509. 

34.  A  mere  squatter  and  his  grantees,  even  though  their 
deeds  are  of  record,  if  not  in  possession  at  the  time  the  suit  is 
brought,    are   not  record   owners  within   the   meaning    of   the 
revenue  laws. 

Railroad  vs.  View,  156  Mo.,  608. 

35.  If  a  curator  fails  to  pay  the  taxes  due  on  his  ward's 
estate,  action  may  be  brought  against  the  curator  and  a  per- 
sonal judgment  rendered  against  him. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Buj&r,  143  Mo.,  209. 

36.  State  and  county  taxes  can  be  sued  for,  only  in  the 
name  of  the  State,  at  the  relation  of  and  to  the  use  of  the  collec- 
tor of  the  county. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  169  Mo.,  563. 


PAYMENT. 

1.  Although  a  tax  may  be  illegal,  yet  if  it  is  voluntarily 
paid  it  cannot  be  recovered  back. 

Christy  vs.  City  of  St.  Louis,  20  Mo.,  143. 
Ruby  vs.  Shain,  54  Mo.,  207. 
County  of  Lewis  vs.  Tate,  10  Mo.,  650. 
Walker  vs.  City  of  St.  Louis,  15  Mo.,  563. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Powell,  44  Mo.,  436. 
Robins  vs.  Latham,  134  Mo.,  466. 

2.  One  claiming  to  be  the  owner  of  land  cannot  recover 
taxes  paid  thereon  by  mistake. 

It  would  be  otherwise  where  the  mistake  is  made  by  the 
collector  in  the  numbers  of  the  land. 

Mathews  vs.  City  of  Kansas,  80  Mo.,  231. 

3.  Under  the  revenue  laws  of  1872  the  grantee  in  a  void 
tax  deed  might  recover  taxes  and  purchase  money  paid  by  him. 

Pitkin  vs.  Reibel,  104  Mo.,  505. 

4.  An  illegal  city  tax,  voluntarily  paid  under  a  mistake  of 
law  cannot  be  recovered. 

Couch  vs.  Kansas  City,   127  Mo.,  436. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  229 

5.  Bonds  were  issued  without  authority  of  law  and  taxes 
levied  to  pay  the  interest  on  them.     One  who  paid  the  taxes 
to  meet  the  interest  on  such  illegal  bonds  cannot  afterwards 
maintain  an  action  against  the  collector  for  the  recovery  of  the 
money  so  paid. 

Rubey  vs.  Shain,  54  Mo.,  207. 
Ranney  vs.   Batler,  67  Mo.,  476. 

6.  Although  the  county  court  has  not  proceeded  regularly 
in  levying  taxes  against  a  railroad,  yet  when  such  taxes  are 
voluntarily  paid  under  such  circumstances,  they  cannot  be  re- 
covered back. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  165  Mo.,  597. 

7.  Where  the  acts  of   a   city   attempting  to   extend   the 
boundaries  thereof  are  void  and  taxes  are  voluntarily  paid  to 
the  city  by  the  owners  of  the  property  taken  into  its  limits  by 
such  void  extension,  such  taxes  are  paid  under  a  mistake  of  law 
and  cannot  be  recovered  back. 

Couch  vs.  Kansas  City,  127  Mo.,  436. 

8.  Under  the  law  of  1865,  delinquent  tax-bills  on  person- 
ality did  not  bear  interest  and  where  a  party  made  vain  ap- 
plication for  the  abatement  of  interest  and  only  paid  it  under 
threat  of  levy  by  the  collector,  he  has  his  action  to  recover  the  in- 
terest so  obtained. 

Maguire  vs.   Savings  Association,  62  Mo.,  344. 

9.  An  ordinance  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis  provided  that  in 
case  consumers  refused  to  pay  the  prescribed  rate  for  water,  the 
water  should  be  turned  off.     Where  plaintiff  pays  the  water 
rate  under  such,  circumstances,  it  is  compulsory,  and  if  the  rate 
charged  is  excessive,  the  excess  may  be  recovered  from  the 
city. 

Brewing  Association  vs.  St.  Louis,  140  Mo.,  419. 
Button  vs.  St.  Louis.  77  Mo.,  47. 

10.  Where  the  officers  of  a  city  exact  an  unauthorized  and 
illegal  license  tax  under  threat  of  immediate  arrest  in  case  of 
refusal,  and  they  are  clothed  with  the  power  to  carry  their 
threat  into  execution  at  once,  a  payment  of  tax  made  to  avoid 


230  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics. 

such  consequences  is  not  voluntary  and  the  money  may  be  re- 
covered back. 

Maguire  vs.  Savings  Association,  62  Mo.,  344. 
Claflin  vs.  McDonough,  33  Mo.,  415. 
Button  vs.  St.  Louis,  77  Mo.,  47. 
Wolfe  vs.  Marshall,  52  Mo.,  167. 
Douglas  vs.  Kansas  City,  147  Mo.,  428. 

11.  Where  a  tax  collector  sold  lands  for  taxes  under  the 
law  of  1872  and  relied  upon  a  tax-book  which  had  not  been 
authenticated  by  the  seal  of  the  county  court,  his  sales  were  in- 
valid and  the  purchaser  at  such  sale  who  pays  taxes  charged  up- 
on a  like  un authenticated  tax-book,  cannot  recover  them  from 
the  successful  claimant  of  the  property. 

Burke  vs.  Brown,   148  Mo.,  309. 

12.  County  warrants  legally  issued  in  1893,  1894  and  1895, 
are  receivable  for  county  taxes  levied  in  1896,  and  warrants 
lawfully  issued  in  1889,  should  be  received  in  payment  of  county 
taxes  for  1891. 

R.  S.,  1889,  Sees.  3205,  7605. 
Logan  vs.  Barton  Co.,  63  Mo.,  336. 
Reynolds  vs.  Norman,  114  Mo.,  509. 
Wilson  vs.  Knox  County,  132  Mo.,  387. 
(Overruled.     See  cases  next  below.) 

13.  County  warrants  issued  to  meet  county  expenses  for 
one  year,  cannot  be  received  by  the  collector  in  payment  of  taxes 
for  any  other  year. 

Book  vs..  Earl,  87  Mo.,  246. 
Andrew  County  ex  rel    vs.  Schell,  135  Mo.,  31. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Payne,  151  Mo.,  663. 
Railroad  vs.  Thornton,   152  Mo.,  570. 


PETITION. 

1.  The  misnomer  of  a  defendant  in  the  petition  and  tax- 
bill,  who  has  been  personally  served  with  summons,  after  a 
trial  to  the  merits,  is  cured  by  the  statute  of  jeofails. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Burr.  143  Mo.,  209. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  231 

2.  Unless  the  allegations  of  the  petition  as  to  unknown 
heirs  is  verified  under  oath,  the  judgment  and  all  subsequent 
proceedings  will  he  void. 

Myers  vs.  McKay,   114   Mo.,  377. 

3.  It  is  the  petition  and  not  the  tax-hill  which  must  state 
the  cause  of  action. 

Vaughan  vs.  Daniels,  98  Mo.,  230. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ran,  93  Mo.,  126. 

4.  If,  from  the  description  in  the  petition,  tax-hill  and 
other  evidence  the  land  can  be  identified  with  reasonable  cer- 
tainty, the  tax  judgment  will  be  affirmed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cowgill,  81  Mo.,  381. 

5.  The  petition  should   describe  the  land   sought  to   be 
charged  with  a  tax  lien. 

Milner  vs.  Shipley,  94  Mo.,  106. 

Vaughan  vs.  Daniels,  98  Mo.,  230. 

City  of  Jefferson  vs.  Whipple,  71  Mo.,  519. 

6.  No  pleading   or  statement    other   than  the   tax-bill  is 
required  in  a  proceeding  by  the  collector  in  the  probate  court 
against  the  estate  of  a  decedent  for  the  collection  of  back  taxes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Seahorn,  139  Mo.,  582. 

7.  A  petition  in  an  action  against  a  railroad  for  delinquent 
taxes,  E.  S.  1879,  section  6889,  need  not  describe  the  property 
otherwise  than  as  so  many  miles  of  a  given  value. 

State  ex  rel.  Trammel  vs.  The  Han.  &  St.  J.  Ry.  Co., 
101  Mo.,  136. 

8.  The  petition  in  tax  suit  should  expressly  allege  that  the 
land  has  been  returned  delinquent  or  has  been  forfeited  to  the 
State;  but  where  it  may  be  gathered  from  the  allegations  of  the 
petition  that  such  is  the  fact,  the  petition  will  be  good  after 
verdict. 

Wellshear  vs.  Kelley,  69  Mo.,  343. 

9.  A  defective  petition  in  a  tax  suit  containing  an  imper- 
fect statement  of  a  good  cause  of  action  is  good  after  verdict, 
where  no  specific  demurrer  was  filed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Renshaw,  166  Mo.,  682. 


232  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laze1?. 

10.  A  petition  to  establish  a  demand  against  the  estate 
of  a  decedent  for  taxes  ought  to  set  out  the  taxes  for  each  year 
in  separate  counts. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Titmann,  103  Mo.,  554. 

11.  A  petition  which  avers  the  assessment  of  personal  prop- 
erty to  a  special  amount;  the  levy  of  specific  taxes  thereon  by 
the  constituted  authorities;  the  effort  of  a  collector  to  collect  the 
taxes;  his  failure  to  do  so,  the  return  of  such  taxes  as  delinquent; 
the  necessity  for  the  suit  for  taxes,  and  incidental  penalties, 
costs  and  attorneys  fees,  is  sufficient. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Cummings,   151  Mo.,  4^. 

12.  In  a  suit  against  an  administrator  by  a  widow  for  money 
paid  by  her  for  taxes  on  the  estate  during  the  administration 
to  prevent  the  sale  thereof,  the  general  allegation  in  her  peti- 
tion that  the  taxes  were  duly  levied  is  sufficient.     She  need 
not  point  out  all  the  details  of  the  revenue  law  or  assert  a  com- 
pliance with  them. 

State  to  use  vs.  White,  61  Mo.,  441. 

13.  Under  the  statutes  of  1889,  in  actions  for  taxes  by  cities 
of  the  second  class,  all  that  is  necessary  to  aver  with  respect  to 
the  taxes  is  the  amount  thereof,  the  rate  of  interest  and  date 
from  which  it  is  claimed,  the  property  upon  which  it  is  charged, 
the  name  of  the  owner  thereof  and  the  year  or  years  for  which 
the  same  was  levied.    If  a  special  tax,  the  date  and  title  of  the 
ordinance  under  which  it  was  levied  and  that  such  tax  has  not 
been  paid,  should  be  alleged.    Such  petition  need  not  allege  that 
a  sale  had  been  discontinued  or  the  realty  had  been  bid  off  by 
the  city,  or  that  the  taxes  became  delinquent  before  the  pass- 
age of  the  Act  of  May  15,  1877. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.  Railroad,  118  Mo.,  671. 

14.  A  petition  to  restrain  the  collection  of  taxes,  on  the 
ground  of  excessive  valuation,  failing  to  allege  that  the  assessor 
failed  to  demand  a  list  is  defective. 

Meyer  vs.   Rosenblatt,   78  Mo.,  495. 

15.  A  petition  against  a  city  collector  for  wrongfully  levy- 
ing on  plaintiff's  property  to  satisfy  a  tax,  which  attacks  the 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  233 

form  and  manner  of  making  the  assessment,  but  sets  out  no 
fact  showing  that  the  assessment  was  void,  is  bad  on  demurrer. 
City  of  Jefferson  vs.  Opel,  49  Mo.,  190. 

16.  Although  it  may  appear  from  the  petition  that  the 
Board  of  Equalization  assessed  the  actual  value  of  railroad  prop- 
erty in  a  county,  instead  of  a  share  in  the  aggregate  value,  pro- 
portioned to  the  number  of  miles  of  road,  yet,  if  from  the  general 
tenor  of  the  petition,  it  appears  that  the  sum  assessed  was  as- 
certained as  the  law  prescribed,  the  pleading  will  be  sufficient. 

Washington  County  vs.  Railroad,  58  Mo.,  372. 

17.  The  general  averment  that  a  sale  of  the  smallest  sub- 
division of  land  would  have  yielded  enough  to  have  paid  the 
judgment  and  costs,  in  a  suit  to  set  aside  a  tax  sale   is  suffi- 
cient, where  it  further  appears  that  the  entire  tract  of  land  was 
sold  for  more  than  seven  times  the  debt. 

Yeaman  vs.  Lepp,  167  Mo.,  61. 


PERSONAL  PROPERTY-SITUS. 

1.  The  necessary  land  for  side  tracks  in  use  by  a  railroad 
company  in  unloading  and  moving  cars  is  assessable  by  the 
State  Board  of  Equalization  and  not  by  the  local  assessor. 

Lands  not  so  owned  and  used  are  subject  to  an  assessment 
by  the  local  authorities. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  135  Mo.,  618. 

2.  Where  defendant  manufacturing  company  resided  in 
and  was  assessed  by  Montgomery  county  for  taxes  in  November 
1893,  but  removed  to  St.  Louis  of  that  year  where  it  paid  a 
manufacturer's  license  for  1894,  it  was  nevertheless  properly 
taxed  in  Montgomery  for  the  last  named  year. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Tobacco  Co.,  140  Mo.,  218. 

3.  The  cars   of  foreign   corporations,   though   carried   in 
transit  through  the  State  of  Missouri,  can  be  subject  to  a  prop- 
erty tax  on  such  cars  only  in  the  State  of  its  domicile,  where 
said  cars  attach  to  its  business  as  an  incident  thereto. 


234  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Cars  in  the  State  of  Missouri  only  in  transit  have  no  situs 
in  the  State. 

Cars  so  used  are  instruments  of  interstate  commerce  and 
cannot  be  taxed  in  this  State. 

State  ex  rel  vs.  Stephens,  146  Mo.,  662. 

4.  All  personal  property  without  regard  to  where  the  same 
may  be  is  assessable  and  taxable  in  the  county  where  the  owner 
resides. 

If  the  property  belongs  to  minors,  their  and  their  curator's 
removal  from  the  county  will  prevent  the  further  taxation  of 
their  property  therein. 

State  ex  rel  vs.  McCausland,  154  Mo.,  185. 

5.  The  residence  of  its  owner  on  the  first  day  of  June, 
1882,  fixes  the  status  of  money  for  the  purposes  of  assessment. 

His  subsequent  removal  to  another  county  and  the  invest- 
ment of  the  money  in  merchandise  and  the  payment  of  a  license 
tax  will  not  prevent  the  collection  of  a  tax  by  the  former  county. 

De  Annan  vs.  Williams,  93  Mo.,   158. 

6.  The  residence  of  the  owner  of  shares  of  stock  in  a  busi- 
ness corporation  fixes  the  situs  of  such  property  for  the  pur- 
poses of  taxation. 

Ogden  vs.  City  of  St.  Joseph,  90  Mo.,  522. 

7.  Under  the  law  of  1879  bonds  kept  in  New  York  in  good 
faith  by  a  citizen  of  this  State  are  nqt  taxable  here. 

Valle  vs.  Ziegler,  84  Mo.,  214. 

8.  The  business  capital  of  a  private  bank  is  taxable  where 
the  business  is  carried  on. 

Such,  capital  does  not  follow  the  situs  of  the  owner. 
State  ex  rel.  Davis  vs.  Rogers,  79  Mo.,  283. 

9.  The  personalty  of  a  deceased  person  is  taxable  in  the 
domicile  in  which  he  resided  at  the  time  of  his  death  and  not 
at  the  domicile  of  the  personal  representatives. 

For  many  purposes  movables  are  deemed  in  law  to  have  no 
situs  except  that  of  the  domicile  of  the  owner. 

'Stephens,  Admr.  vs.   Mayor  of  Boonville,  34  Mo., 
323. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  235 

10.  Personal  property  of  a  resident  of  this  State  which  is 
situated  heyond  its  limits  cannot  he  taxed  here. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Wiggins  Ferry  Co.,  40  Mo.,  581. 

11.  Taxation  of  personal  property  does  not  necessarily  fol- 
low the  domicile  of  the  owner;  hut  depends  upon  the  situs  of  the 
property, 

12.  Where  a  corporation  is  created  under  the  laws  of  an- 
other state,  hut  has  an  office  and  does  business  within  this  State 
and  has  property  here,  it  is  a  resident  of  this  State  within  the 
meaning  of  the  revenue  law. 

City  of  St.  Louis  vs.  Wiggins  Ferry  Co.,  40  Mo.,  531. 

13.  The  actual  situs  of  personal  property  and  not  the  dom- 
icle  of  its  owner  determines  what  sovereignty  shall  exercise  the 
taxing  power. 

Personal  property  in  the  hands  of  an  administrator  in  this 
State,  belonging  to  a  person  who  lived  and  died  in  another  state 
is  taxable  here. 

State  of  Missouri  ex  rel.  Taylor  &  Lee  vs.  St.  Louis 
County  Court,  47  Mo.,  594. 

14.  Personal  property  which  is  capable  of  having  an  ac- 
tual situs,  is  taxable  in  the  county  where  it  is  situated. 

Other  personal  property  having  no  situs  is  taxable  in  the 
county  where  the  owner  resides. 

The  rolling-stock  of  a  railroad  company  which  is  in  a  county 
in  transit  or  temporary,  is  not  taxable  in  such  county,  but  is  to 
be  assessed  and  taxed  in  the  county  which  is  the  legal  residence 
of  the  corporation. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Cass  Co.,  53  Mo.,  17. 

15.  Personal  property  of  non-residents,  if  found  situated 
within  this  State,  is  taxable  here,  regardless  of  in  whose  hands 
it  happens  to  be. 

St.  Louis  vs.  Ferry  Co.,  40  Mo.,  581. 

16.  Municipal  bonds  belonging  to  a  person  who  has  his 
domicile  in  this  State,  when  sent  into  another  state  for  safe 
keeping  and  not  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  taxation,  are  not 
taxable  here. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Howard  Co.  Court,  69  Mo.,  454. 


236  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laics; 

17.  Where  the  evidence  shows  the  residence  of  the  owner 
of  notes  secured  by  mortgage  to  be  in  the  town  where  the  notes 
were  left  with  a  bank  for  collection  on  the  first  day  of  June 
of  the  year  assessment  was  made,  the  situs  of  the  property  is 
sufficiently  established  for  the  purpose    of    taxation    in    that 
county. 

Where  there  is  evidence  to  support  the  finding  of  the  jury 
that  the  owner  of  property  was  a  resident  of  this  State  at  the 
time  the  property  was  assessed,  the  finding  of  the  jury  on  that 
point  will  not  be  reviewed  or  disturbed. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Renshaw,  166  Mo.,  682. 

18.  Steamboats  are  subject  to  taxation  at  their  home  port, 
and  where  their  nominal  owners  reside. 

St.  Joseph  vs.  Saville,  39  Mo.,  461. 

19.  Cars  belonging  to  a  foreign  corporation,  but  leased  and 
operated  by  railroads  in  this  State,  are  taxable  as  a  property 
of  such  corporation  and  should  be  taxed  in  the  county  in  which 
such  corporation  has  its  chief  place  of  business. 

State  of  Missouri  ex  rel.  vs.  St.  Louis  Co.  Court, 
13  App.,  53. 

20.  Personal  property  of  non-residents,  if  situate  within 
this  State,  is  taxable  here  regardless  of  in  whose  hands  it  hap- 
pens to  be. 

Curtis  vs.  Ward,  Adm'r.,  58  Mo.,  295. 

21.  A  railroad  company  in  this  State  cannot  be  taxed  under 
the  Act  of  1871  upon  the  cars  of  the  Pullman  Palace  Car  Com- 
pany, leased  and  operated  by  said  railroad. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  St.  Louis  County,  84  Mo.,  234. 

22.  The  rolling  stock  of  a  railroad  should,  as  a  general 
rule,  be  taxed  where  the  corporation  has  its  residence. 

But  it  was  legal  for  the  Legislature  to  pass  a  law  by  which 
such  property  should  be  distributed  in  the  counties,  cities  and 
towns  through  which  the  road  passes,  in  proportion  to  the  length 
of  the  road  in  such  localities. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Severance,  55  Mo.,  378. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  237 

23.  Property  purchased  by  a  railroad  company  for  future 
yard  purposes,  but  used  by  a  lessee  for  manufacturing  purposes, 
is  assessable  as  local  property. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railway  Company,  117  Mo.,  I. 

24.  Such  yards  and  other  real  property  necessarily  appur- 
tenant to  a  railroad,  effected  as  a  means  of  traffic,  are  not  sub- 
ject to  taxation  by  local  authorities. 

It  is  to  be  assessed  by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Company,  162  Mo.,  391. 


PUBLICATION-SERVICE  BY. 

1.  A  strict  compliance  with  the  statutory  requirements  as 
to  constructive  service  is  necessary. 

Myers  vs.  McRay,  114  Mo.,  377. 
Charles  vs.  Morrow,  99  Mo.,  638. 
Harness  vs.  Cravens,  126  Mo.,  233. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  White,  75  App./ 257. 

2.  Where  the  statute  provides  the  mode  for  proving  the 
due  publication  of  notice  of  a  tax  sale,  such  mode  is  exclusive 
and  cannot  be  supplied  by  other  evidence. 

Comfort  vs.  Ballingal,  134  Mo.,  281. 

3.  It  is  sufficient  to  designate  the  owner  in  the  order  of 
publication  by  the  name  disclosed  by  the  record. 

Elting  vs.  Gould,  96  Mo.,  535. 

4.  If  there  is  any  conflict  between  recitals  in  the  judgment, 
as  to  the  terms  of  the  order  of  publication   and  the  order  itself, 
then  the  latter  recitals  must  control. 

Milner  vs.  Shipley,  94  Mo.,  106. 
Crow  vs.  Meyersieck,  88  Mo.,  411. 
Adams  vs.  Cowels,  95  Mo.,  501. 
Stewart  vs.  Allison,  150  Mo.,  343. 

5.  Notice  by  publication  in  a  tax  suit  is  sufficient  where 
it  names  the  defendants  so  as  to  clearly  indicate  their  identity. 

Cruzen  vs.  Stephens,  123  Mo.,  337. 


238  Digest  of  the  Revenue  La^vs. 

6.  The  order  of  publication,  when  regularly  made,  cannot 
be  collaterally  attacked,  as  against  an  innocent  purchaser  at  a 
tax  sale. 

Schmidt  vs.  Niemeyer,   100  Mo.,  207. 

7.  In  a  tax  suit  against  unknown  parties,  the  fact  authoriz- 
ing notice  by  publication    must  be  verified. 

It  is  not  sufficient  to  merey  allege  non-residence. 

An  unverified  allegation  is  sufficient  as  to  named  defendants. 

Rohrer  vs.  Oder,  124  Mo..  24. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Staley,  76  Mo.,  158. 

8.  The  order  of  publication  is  as  much  a  part  of  the  record 
proper    as   the   judgment    itself.     Unless    both   the  order  and 
notice  of  publication  describe  the  land,  the  judgment  is  void. 

Stewart  vs.  Allison,  150  Mo.,  343. 

9.  It  is  not  necessary  that  the  order  of  publication  in  a 
back  tax  suit  should  contain  a  description  of  the  land. 

Goldsworthy  vs.  Johnson,  87  Mo.,  233. 
Allen  vs.  Ray,  96  Mo.,  542. 
(Overruled.     See  cases  next  below.) 

10.  In  all  suits  for  delinquent  taxes,  the  purpose  of  which 
is  to  enforce  the  State's  lien  against  the  land,  and  the  service 
is  by  publication,  the  land  must  be  described  in  the  order  of 
publication;  otherwise  the  judgment  is  void. 

Winningham  vs.  Trueblood,  149  Mo.,  572. 
vStewart  vs.  Allison,  150  Mo.,  343. 
Lumber  Company  vs.  Lasley,  88  App.,  370. 

11.  The  allegation  of  the  non-residence  of  named  defend- 
ants in  an  unverified  petition,  is  sufficient  to  support  an  order  of 
publication,  as  to  them. 

Elting  vs.  Gould,  96  Mo.,  535. 
Payne  vs.  Lott,  90  Mo.,  676. 

12.  The  fact  that  the  order  of  publication  omitted  one  of 
the  years  for  which  taxes  are  due,  will  not  effect  the  judgment 
in  a  collateral  proceeding. 

Williams  vs.  Hudson,  93  Mo.,  524. 

13.  Where  the  court  found  from  the  sheriff's  return  that 
the  defendant  was  a  non-resident  and  made  an  order  of  publi- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

cation  thereon,  if  it  afterwards  appear  that  the  defendant  was 
in  fact  a  resident  of  the  State,  the  judgment  will  be  set  aside 
upon  a  writ  of  error,  prosecuted  for  that  purpose. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  White,  75  App.,  261. 

14.  The  collector's  affidavit  for  order  of  publication  may 
be  upon  information  and  belief. 

It  need  not  state  that  service  could  not  be  had  by  ordinary 
summons. 

Coombs  vs.  Crabtree,  105  Mo.,  292. 

15.  Section  17,  chapter  164,  G.  S.  1865,  (and  not  section 
5,  chapter  175,  G.  S.  1865.  amended  laws  of  1887,  page  344),  is 
applicable  to  publication    in  newspapers,  of  the  orders  of  pub- 
lication of  notice  to  non-residents. 

Coombs  vs.  Crabtree,  105  Mo.,  292. 

16.  The  interest  of  the  defendants  and  how  derived   must 
be  set  out  in  the  petition  and  order  of  publication. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Staley,  76  Mo.,  158. 

17.  When  the  plaintiff  alleges  in  his  petition,  or  files  an 
affidavit  alleging  the  non-residence  of  defendant,  an  order  of 
publication  must  be  made  even  though  defendant  be  a  resi- 
dent. 

When  such  steps  are  taken,  there  is  no  discretion  in  the 
judge  or  clerk  to  refuse  the  order. 

In  the  absence  of  such  allegation  or  affidavit  and  upon  a 
return  upon  a  regular  summons  of  "not  found, "  the  court  has 
jurisdiction  to  investigate  whether  defendant  can  be  found  and 
to  make  an  order  of  publication  if  it  be  of  opinion  that  he  can- 
not, but  it  has  no  jurisdiction  upon  such  return  to  examine 
into  the  question  of  non-residence. 

The  sheriff's  return  of  "not  found"  is  the  basis  for  the  order 
of  publication  under  section  2024,  E.  S.  1889. 

Tooker  vs.  Leake,  146  Mo.,  419. 

18.  Where  a  petition  in  a  suit  for  back  taxes  is  signed  by 
the  collector,  and  he  makes  affidavit  at  the  end  thereof,  "that 
he  has  good  reason  to  believe,  and  does  believe,  that  the  de- 


240  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

fendant  is  a  non-resident  of  the  State,"  this  answers  the  re- 
quirement of  the  statute. 

Allen  vs.  Ray,  96  Mo.,  543. 

19.  An  order  of  publication  to  Miller,  is  a  nullity  as  to  one 
whose  name  is  Millen. 

Chamberlain  vs.  Blodgett,  96  Mo.,  482. 

20.  Publication  against  Daniel  Tragar,  is  a  nullity  against 
Daniel  Troyer,  and  those  claiming  under  him. 

This  is  true,  even  though  in  recording  Troyer 's  deed  the 
name  was  mistakenly  recorded  Trager. 

Troyer  vs.  Wood,  96  Mo.,  478. 
Chamberlain  vs.  Blodgett,  96,  Mo.,  482. 

21.  Service  by  publication  on  Q.  R.  Noland  is  void  as  to 
Quinces  R.  Noland. 

Skelton  vs.  Sackett,  91  Mo.,  377. 

22.  Publication  to  Etta  R.  Fisher  and  -  -  Fisher,  her 
husband,  is  valid,  as  against  collateral  attack. 

Cruzen  vs.  Stephens,  123  Mo.,  337. 

23.  It  is  sufficient  in  an  order  of  publication  to  designate 
Richard  0.  Elting  as  R,  0.  Eltiug. 

Elting  vs.  Gould,  96  Mo.,  365. 

24.  Publication,  to  0.  T.  Clements  is  sufficient  where  the 
land  is  recorded  in  the  name  of  Charles  T.  Clements. 

Mosley  vs.  Reily,  126  Mo.,  124. 

25.  Publication  to  H.  L.  Downs  is  not  sufficient  where  the 
owner's  name  is  Hudson  L.  Downs. 

Riffle  vs.  Lumber  Company,  93  App.,  41. 

26.  Publcation  addressed  to  Henry  Wheler  is  a  nullity  as 
to  Henry  Whelen. 

Whelen  vs.  Weaver,  93  Mo.,  430. 

27.  Publication  against  Owen  Corrigan  is  a  nullity  as  to 
John  Owen  Corrigan. 

Corrigan  vs.  Schmidt,  126  Mo.,  304. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  241 

28.  Publication  to  Elisha  Corrigan  is  a  nullity  as  to  Eliza- 
beth Alicin  Oorrigan. 

Corrigan  vs.  Schmidt,  126  Mo.,  304. 

29.  Publication  to  Vaughn  Turner  is  a  nullity  as  to  Single- 
ton Vaughn  Turner,  and  the  judgment  rendered  thereunder  is 
subject  to  collateral  attack. 

Turner  vs.  Gregory,  151  Mo.,  100. 


PURCHASER  AT  TAX  SALES. 

1.  A  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  acquires  the  interest  of  the 
defendant  in  the  tax  suit. 

Graves  vs.  Ewart,  99  Mo.,  13. 
L.  £  L.  Co.  vs.  Tie  Co.,  87  App.,  167. 
Powell  vs.  Greenstreet,  95  Mo.,  13. 
Jasper  County  vs.  Wadlow,  82  Mo.,  172. 

2.  If  the  defendant  had  only  an  equity,  the  purchaser  at 
a  tax  sale  acquires  that  only. 

Jasper  County  vs.  Wadlow,  82  Mo.,  172. 

3.  The  holder  of  a  junior  lien  who  was  not  made  a  party 
to  the  suit  to  enforce  the  State's  lien  for  taxes  may  redeem 
from  the  purchaser  under  the  tax  sale. 

Stafford  vs.  Fizer,  82  Mo.,  393. 

4.  A  purchaser  of  lands  at  a  tax  sale  who  discourages  bid- 
ding by  representing  that  he  is  buying  in  the  land  for  the  owner, 
becomes  a  trustee  for  such  owner  or  the  sale  may  be  set  aside. 

Merett  vs.  Poulter,  96  Mo.,  237. 

5.  A  county  collector  has  the  right  to  purchase  at  a  sale 
of  lands  for  taxes  under  an  execution  issued  to  a  sheriff. 

Walcott  vs.  Hand,   122  Mo.,  621. 

6.  The  purchaser  acquires  a  title  superior  to  that  of  a  pur- 
chaser at  a  trustee's  sale. 

Allen  vs.  McCabe,  93  Mo.,  138. 

D— 16 


242  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs. 

7.  One  who  is  under  no  obligation  to  pay  taxes  on  real 
estate  may  purchase  the  same  at  its  sale  for  taxes. 

Atkison  vs.  Dixon,  89  Mo.,  464. 

8.  The  rights  of  a  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  cannot  be  superior 
to  those  of  the  State.    If  the  State  had  no  valid  charge  on  the 
land,  the  party  who  purchases  at  such  a  sale  only  becomes  sub- 
rogated  to  the  State's  claim.    Where,  therefore,  lands  were  sold 
for  taxes  by  a  collector  upon  tax -books  which  have  not  been 
authenticated  by  the  seal  of  the  court,  the  proceeding  was  with- 
out authority  of  law,  and  a  purchaser  at  such  sale  who  pays 
taxes  charged  upon  a  like  un authenticated  book,  cannot  recover 
them  from  the  successful  claimant. 

Burke  vs.  Brown,  148  Mo.,  309. 

9.  The  purchaser  of  land  at  a  tax  sale,  or  one  holding  under 
him  who  has  made  valuable  improvements  on  the  land  under  the 
belief  that  his  title  is  good,  will  be  .allowed  compensation  for  his 
improvements  in  an  action  against  him  to  redeem. 

Burk  vs.  Green,  101  Mo.,  625. 

10.  Where  a  tax  deed  is  held  invalid  because  not  executed 
substantially  as  provided  for  in  the  statute,  the  grantee  therein 
may  recover  his  purchase  money,  interest,  penalties  and  costs. 

Biugham  vs.  Birmingham,  103  Mo.,  345. 

11.  Under  the  revenue  law  of  1872,  the  title  to  land  pur- 
chased at  a  tax  sale  does  not  vest  in  the  purchaser  until  the 
delivery  of  the  tax  deed. 

Hilton  vs.  Smith,  134  Mo.,  499. 

12.  A  purchaser  at  an  invalid  tax  sale  who  subsequently 
pays  taxes  on  the  land  cannot  in  the  absence  of  statutory  pro-- 
vision—and there  has  been  none  in  this  State  since  1877— re- 
cover from  the  owner  of  the  land  the  amount  paid  for  the  land 
at  the  sale,  or  the  amount  of  the  tax  subsequently  paid. 

Carter  vs.  Phillips,  49  App.,  319. 

13.  A  purchaser  at  a  subsequent  tax  sale  does  not  become 
liable  for  money  paid  by  a  former  purchaser  under  an  older 
assessment. 

Smith  vs.  Laumeier,  12  App.,  546. 
Smith  vs.  Laumeier,  84  Mo.,  672. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  243 

14.  A 1  though  a  copy  of  the  assessor's  book  furnished  to 
tlie  collector  by  the  clerk  of  the  county  court  was  not  authenti- 
cated by  the  seal  of  the  court,  this  does  not  defeat  the  right  of 
a  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  to  recover  the  sum  paid  from  the 
owner  together  with  interest  and  penalties. 

Taft  vs.  McCullock,  135  Mo.,  588. 

15.  A  puehaser  at  a  tax  sale  who  fails  in  his  ejectment 
suit  is  entitled  to  recover  the  purchase  price  at  the  sale  and  the 
taxes  afterwards  paid  by  him,  even  though  his  tax  deed  is 
void. 

Gregg  vs.  Jesburg,  113  Mo.,  34. 

16.  Where  the  holder  of  a  tax  deed  is  defeated,  the  success- 
ful claimant  should  pay  him  taxes,  interest,  costs  and  redemp- 
tion money.    The  amount  necessary  to  redeem  the  land  should 
be  included  is  his  judgment. 

Second  Wagoner  Statute,  page  1202,  Allen  vs.  Buck- 
ley, 94  Mo.,  158. 
White  vs.  Shell,  84  Mo.,  569. 

*  17.  The  title  does  not  pass  to  the  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale 
until  the  execution  of  a  deed  to  him.  But  a  sheriff's  deed  re- 
lates back  to  the  sale  as  to  the  defendant  in  the  execution,  and 
his  privies  and  strangers  with  notice. 

Porter  vs.  Mariner,  50  Mo.,  364. 
Leach  vs.  Koenig,  55  Mo.,  451. 
Ford  vs.  French,  72  Mo.,  250. 
Lewis  vs.  Curry,  74  Mo.,  49. 
Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 
Fleckenstein  vs.  Baxter,  114  Mo.,  493. 

18.  No  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  can  obtain  an  interest  in  the 
land  sold  that  the  defendant  in  the  tax  suit  never  held  or 
owned.     He  can  acquire  only  the  right,  title  and  interest  of 
such  parties  as  are  made  defendants  therein. 

Moore  vs.  Woodruff,  146  Mo.,  597. 

19.  In  an  action  to  vacate  a  judgment  for  taxes,  the  pur- 
chaser of  a  part  of  land  sold  under  the  judgment  was  made  a 
party  defendant.     The  court  found  that  such  purchaser  bought 
the  land  in  good  faith  without  notice  of  any  of  the  facts  alleged, 


244  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

and  held  that  such  purchaser  could  not  complain  of  the  action 
of  the  trial  court  in  setting  aside  the  judgment  for  taxes. 
Bagley  vs.  Furnace  Co.,  120  Mo.,  248. 

20.  A  purchaser  at  a  sheriff's  sale  looks  to  the  judgment, 
execution,  levy  and  sheriff's  deed.     All  other  questions  are  be- 
tween the  parties  to  the  judgment  and  the  sheriff. 

Lenox  vs.  Clarke,  52  Mo.,  115. 
Hewitt  vs.  Weatherby,  57  Mo.,  276. 
Childers  vs.  Schantz,  120  Mo.,  305. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Sargent,  12  App.,  228. 

21.  The  rights  of  a  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  are  determined 
by  the  law  in  existence  at  that  time. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mantz,  62  Mo.,  258. 

22.  Where  a  deed  has  been  duly  recorded,  subsequent  pur- 
chasers are  bound  to  take  notice  of  it,  even  though  the  deed 
record  be  destroyed  and  the  tax  suit  be  brought  against  the  ap- 
parent record  owner. 

Crane  vs.  Dameron,  98  Mo.,  567. 

23.  The  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale,  under  the  Revenue  Acfr  of 
1872,  if  defeated  in  an  action  for  the  recovery  of  the  land  may 
nevertheless  recover  his  purchase  money  with  taxes  afterwards 
paid,  penalties,  interest  and  costs. 

Pitkin  vs.  Miller,  106  Mo.,  577. 
Pitkin  vs.  Shacklett,  106  Mo.,  571. 

24.  An  owner  of  land  sold  for  taxes,  who  with  full  knowl- 
edge of  all  the  facts  accepts  a  part  of  the  process  of  the  sale, 
recognizes  and  ratifies  its  validity  will  not  be  heard  to  ques- 
tion it. 

Clybnrn  vs.  McLaughlin,  106  Mo.,  521. 

25.  A  sale  of  land  for  taxes  carries  the  legal  title. 

Myers  vs.  Bassett,  84  Mo.,  479. 

26.  The  assignee  of  a  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale,  who  is  un- 
able to  recover  the  land,  may  recover  under  the  law  of  1872, 
taxes  penalties,  interest  and  costs,  paid  by  such  purchaser. 

Pitkin  vs.  Reibel,  104  Mo.,  505. 
Pitkin   vs.   Shacklett,   106   Mo.,  571. 
Pitkin  vs.  Miller,  106  Mo..  577. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  245 

27.  Under  the  Act  of  1847,  if  the  collector  fails  to  make  the 
return  required  by  law,  the  purchaser  took  nothing. 

Donohoe  vs.  Hartless,  33  Mo.,  335. 

28.  A  purchaser  under  a  deed  which  purports  to  convey 
to  him  "all  the  right,  title  and  estate  of  the  State  of  Missouri, 
in  and  to  the  premises,77  receives  no  title. 

Einstein  vs.  Gav,  45  Mo.,  62. 
Ketchem  vs.  Mullinix,  92  Mo.,  118. 

29.  The  collector  who  brought  the  suit  for  taxes  may  pur- 
chase. 

Walcott  vs.  Hand,  122  Mo.,  621. 
Turner  vs.  Gregory,   151  Mo.,   100. 

30.  Although  a  judgment  for  taxes  be  set  aside  for  want 
of  sufficient  notice,  yet  if  the  property  had  been  sold  under  said 
judgment  and  the  purchaser  was  not  notified  of  the  proceedings 
to  set  aside  the  same,  his  deed  is  not  affected  by  the  order  vacat- 
ing the  judgment. 

Schiffman  vs.  Shmidt,  154  Mo.,  204. 

31.  The  purchaser  at  a  tax  sale  under  a  valid  judgment 
against  a  non-resident,  succeeds  to  whatever  right  the  judgment 
defendant  had  against  a  trespasser. 

Stephens  vs.  Black,  168  Mo.,  549. 


RAILROADS. 

1.  Under  the  Act  of  1875,  the  road-bed  of  railroads  for  the 
purpose  of  assessment  is  not  local  property. 

The  school  taxes  on  the  same  are  to  be  apportioned  among 
the  districts  of  the  county  in  the  proportion  that  the  number  of 
the  children  in  each  district  bears  to  the  whole  number  in  the 
county. 

In  the  matter  of  the  apportioning  of  taxes,  78  Mo., 

596. 

2.  Unless  the  townships  have  made  valid  subscriptions  to 
the  railroads,  under  the  Act  of  1877,  the  railroad  taxes  are  dis- 
tributable ratably  among  all  the  school  districts  in  the  county. 


246  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Taxes  arising  from  land,  shops  and  other  buildings  belong- 
ing to  the  railroad,  go  to  the  school  districts  in  which  said  prop- 
erty is  situated. 

School  District  vs.  Rhoades,  81  Mo.,  473. 

3.  Under  section  6880,  E.  S.  1879,  taxes  can  be  levied  against 
railroad  property  for  the  purpose  of  building  a  schoolhouse. 

State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Railroad,  83  Mo.,  395. 

4.  Under  the  Act  of  1871,  p.  56,  Pullman  cars  operated  by  a 
railroad  company  under  a  lease  are  not  subject  to  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  Pullman  Car  Co.  vs.  St.  Louis  County, 
84  Mo.,  234. 

5.  County  courts  must  conform  strictly  to  the  requirements 
of  section  6799,  E.  S.  1879,  in  levying  a  railroad  interest  and  sink- 
ing fund  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  Clinton  Co.  vs.  Railroad.  87  Mo..  236. 

6.  A  railroad  bridge,  though  constituting  a  part  of  the 
track,  if  used  as  a  toll  bridge  is  taxable  as  a  bridge. 

If  not  so  used  it  is  taxable  as  a  part  of  the  railroad. 

State  ex  rel.  Tillery  vs.  Railroad,  89  Mo.,  98. 

7.  Laws  of  1868,  p.  90,  did  not  exempt  from  taxation  branch 
railroads. 

Nor  was  property  acquired  under  section  2,  Laws  of  1870, 
p.  90,  exempt  from  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  89  Mo.,  523. 

8.  Taxes  can  be  levied  on  railroads  to  build  schoolhouses. 
Only  the  taxes  for  school  purposes  proper  can  be  levied 

against  railroads. 

State  ex  rel.  Setzer  vs.  Railroad,  90  Mo.,  166 

9.  The  same  rule  of  taxation  under  the  Act  of  1875,  p.  119, 
must  be  applied  to  both  railroad  and  general  property. 

State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Railroad,  92  Mo.,  137. 

10.  Taxes  to  pay  interest  on  railroad  fund  can  only  be  levied 
in  conformity  to  section  6791,  E.  S.  1879. 

State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Railroad,  92  Mo.,  137- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  247 

11.  Section  6885,  B.  S.  1879.  authorizing  the  levy  of  a  school 
tax  on  railroad  property  and  providing  a  mode  therefor  is  con- 
stitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Railroad,  92  Mo.,  137. 

12.  The  constitutional  limitation  of  40  cents  on  the  $100 
valuation  of  railroad  property  for  school  purposes  may  be  in- 
creased by  a  vote. 

When  so  increased,  the  net  rate  becomes  a  constitutional 
limit. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Lamkin,  97  Mo.,  496. 

13.  Under  section  6901,  B.  S.  1879,  a  railroad  bridge  owned 
by  a  railroad  company  and  used  as  a  part  of  its  track  is  taxable 
as  a  part  of  the  road. 

This  is  true  although  it  be  used  in  part  as  a  toll  bridge  for 
ordinary  travel,  and  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  has  no 
power  to  assess  it. 

State  ex  rel.  Tillery  vs.  Railroad,  97  Mo.,  348. 

14.  As  amended  the  Laws  of  1885,  p.  230,  with  respect 
to  the  levy  of  school  taxes  for  building  purposes  against  railroad 
property,  is  constitutional. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Lamkin,  97  Mo.,  496. 

15.  A  petition  in  an  action  against  a  railroad  for  delinquent 
taxes,  B.  S.  1879,  section  6889,  need  not  describe  the  property 
otherwise  than  as  so  many  miles  of  a  given  value. 

State  ex  rel.  Trammel  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  136. 

16.  The  order  of  the  county  court  which  directs  the  clerk 
to  extend  the  specified  tax  at  a  specified  rate  on  the  tax  book 
against  railroad  property  for  the  omitted  years  is  a  sufficient 
levy. 

State  ex  rel.  Trammel  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  136. 

17.  Adjournments  of  the  county  court  from  day  to  day  for  a 
number  of  days  are  a  part  of  the  regular  term  within  the  mean- 
ing of  B.  S.  1879,  section  6879. 

State  ex  rel.  Trammel  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  136. 

18.  A  provision  of  the  law  incorporating  the  Hannibal  &  St. 
Joseph  Bailroad  company  exempted  the  stock  of  said  company 


248  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

from  city  and  county  taxes— held  that  the  exemption  included  a 
tax  levied  to  pay  bonds  given  by  it  for  stock  in  the  railroad  com- 
pany. 

State  ex  rel.  Trammel  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  136. 

19.  The  portion  of  a  railroad  bridge  across  the  Mississippi 
river,  lying  in  the  State  of  Missouri  is,  while  owned  by  a  bridge 
company,  taxable  as  a  bridge  and  not  as  a  part  of  a  railroad  line, 
although  operated  and  used  by  the  railroad  company  under  a 
lease. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Mississippi  River  Bridge  Co.,   109 
Mo.,  253. 

20.  A  railroad  company's  buildings  should  be  taxed  for 
school  purposes  at  a  local  rate  fixed  in  the  districts  where  situ- 
ated and  not  at  the  average  rate  throughout  the  county. 

State  ex  rel.  Lane  vs.  Railroad,  no  Mo.,  265. 

21.  A  township  tax  levied  to  pay  bonds  issued  in  aid  of  a 
railroad  is  not  a  county  tax  within  the  meaning  of  the  provision 
in  the  company's  charter  exempting  it  from  county  taxes. 

Section  6790,  E.  S.  1879,  in  so  far  as  it  applies  to  levies  is 
unconstitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  117  Mo.,  297. 

22.  Taxes  specially  levied  on  railroad  land  to  pay  judg- 
ments against  a  county,  are  county  taxes  within  the  meaning  of 
section  7640,  E.  S.  1889,  and  are  to  be  included  in  computing  the 
collector's  commissions. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Ewing,  116  Mo.,  129. 

23.  Held,  under  the  facts  in  this  case,  that  certain  property 
purchased  by  a  railroad  company  for  future  yard  purposes  was 
subject  to  local  assessments  and  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  117  Mo.,  i. 

24.  Cities  existing  under  special  charter  on  March  307  1884, 
were  without  authority  to  levy  or  sue  for  taxes  on  railroad 
property. 

After  becoming  a  city  of  the  second  class,  the  general  stat- 
ute governed  in  the  matter  of  assessing,  levying  and  suing  for 
taxes. 

City  of  St.  Joseph  vs.  Railroad,  118  Mo.,  671. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  249 

25.  Only  the  length  of  the  main  track  of  a  railroad  is  to  be 
considered  by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  in  determining  the 
length  of  roads  for  the  purpose  of  apportioning  its  property 
for  taxation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stone,  119  Mo.,  668. 

26.  The  irregularities  in  the  estimates  returned  by  school 
districts  in  failing  to  mention  the  amount  of  the  several  funds 
which  the  levy  will  produce  and  in  computing  the  average  rate  of 
taxation  for  school  buildings,  sinking  fund  and  annual  interest, 
are  cured  by  the  statute  and  do  not  constitute  ground  for  enjoin- 
ing the  collection  of  the  tax. 

Railroad  vs.  Gracy,  126  Mo.,  472. 

27.  A  bridge  across  the  Mississippi  river,  the  legal  title  to 
which  is  in  the  bridge  company,  is  taxable  as  a  bridge  and  not  as 
a  part  of  the  railroad  to  which  it  is  leased. 

Under  section  7564,  E.  S.  1889,  a  tax  for  city  purposes 
against  a  bridge  is  invalid  unless  levied  by  authority  of  the  cir- 
cuit court  or  judge  in  vacation. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bridge  Co.,  134  Mo.,  321. 

28.  The  necessary  land  owned  and  used  by  a  railroad  com- 
pany for  side-traks  and  used  in  loading  and  moving  cars  is  assess- 
able by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization,  but  other  lands  owned 
by  railroads  and  not  so  used  nor  required  for  the  purposes  spec- 
ified are  subject  to  assessment  by  a  local  authority. 

State  ex  rel.  vs  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  618. 

29.  The  county  clerk  derives  no  authority  to  extend  school 
taxes  upon  the  property  of  a  railroad  company  from  an  order  of 
the  county  court. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  618. 

30.  In  levying  taxes  on  a  railroad's  distributable  property, 
the  county  court  and  other  officers  act  in  invitum  and  not  as  a 
judicial  tribunal. 

Whether  the  taxes  are  legally  levied  is  a  question  to  be  de- 
termined by  an  action  brought  in  the  circuit  court. 

A  railroad  company  cannot  be  heard  to  say  that  the  average 
rate  at  which  its  property  has  been  assessed  for  local  school 
taxes  is  too  low. 


"250  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

The  aggregate  levy  of  the  tax  at  the  average  rate  of  the 
school  districts  of  the  county  is  not  invalidated  by  the  failure  to 
separately  find  and  levy  the  rate  for  each  fund. 

Estimates  furnished  by  the  school  districts  in  the  county 
held  to  have  sufficiently  fixed  the  rates  from  which  to  deduce  an 
average  rate  for  taxation  of  railroad  property  for  school  pur- 
poses. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  618. 

31.  Cars  in  the  State  of  Missouri  only  in  transit  have  not 
such  situs  in  this  State  as  will  authorize  their  taxation. 

Cars  so  used  are  instruments  of  interstate  commerce  and 
cannot  be  taxed  in  this  State. 

vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Stephens,  146  Mo.,  662. 

32.  The  rate  of  taxation  to  be  levied  against  railroad  prop- 
erty for  school  building  purposes  must  be  determined  by  the 
-county  courts. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  149  Mo.,  635. 

33.  The  property  of  a  railroad  company  in  a  county  subject 
to  taxation  for  general  purposes  is  also  subject  to  taxation  to  pay 
bonds  issued  to  it  by  a  county  exchanged  for  stocks  subscribed 
by  it  in  the  railroad  company. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  153  Mo.,  157. 

34.  Switches  and  yards  and  other  real  property  belonging 
to  and  used  by  a  railroad  company  as  a  means  of  traffic  and  for 
the  purposes  of  a  carrier  are  not  subject  to  taxation  by  local 
authorities. 

Lands  owned  in  excess  of  what  is  necessary  for  such  pur- 
poses are  subject  to  be  taxed  by  the  local  authorities. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  162  Mo.,  391. 

35.  Where  the  assessor  of  Cass  county  for  1869  made  no 
assessment  of  the  property  of  a  railroad  company,  an  order  sub- 
sequently made  by  the  county  board  of  equalization  assessing  the 
property  for  that  year  was  void : 

1.  Because  no  notice  was  given  as  required  by  the  Act  of 
1868. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  251 

2.  Because  the  board  had  no  authority  to  make  an  assess- 
ment. It  only  had  the  power  to  increase  or  diminish  the  valua- 
tion made  by  the  assessor. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Cass  Co.,  53  Mo.,  17. 

36.  Where  an  illegal  railroad  tax  has  been  collected  from  a 
tax-payer  he  cannot  recover  back  the  amount. 

Rubey  vs.  Shane,  54  Mo.,  207. 

37  Under  the  Act  of  March  10,  1871,  all  railroad  property 
was  to  be  assessed  by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 

Said  Board  was  to  ascertain  the  value  of  such  property 
within  the  limits  of  cities  and  certify  the  amount  to  them  as  the 
proper  basis  for  an  assessment  in  favor  of  a  city. 

Said  act  is  not  void  as  violating  that  provision  of  the  State 
Constitution  that  declares  that  taxation  on  property  shall  be 
uniform. 

As  a  general  rule,  the  rolling  stock  of  a  railroad  company 
should  be  assessed  and  taxed  where  the  corporation  has  its  resi- 
dence. 

The  failure  of  the  Act  of  March  10,  1871,  to  designate  a  par- 
ticular mode  by  which  cities  and  towns  may  collect  taxes  from 
railroads  under  the  valuations  made  by  the  Board  of  Equaliza- 
tion does  not  invalidate  the  act. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Severance,  et  al,  55  Mo.,  379. 

38.  An  assessment  of  valuations  made  by  a  board  of,  equali- 
zation without  any  evidence  before  it  would  be  invalid. 

Washington  County  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  58  Mo.,  372. 

39.  Under  the  Act  of  September  20,  1852,  it  was  made  the 
duty  of  the  president  of  the  Hannibal  &  St.  Joseph  Railroad  Com- 
pany to  furnish  under  oath  a  statement  showing  actual  value  of 
the  railroad  property  from  which  statement  the  auditor  should 
assess  the  railroad  State  tax. 

This  provision  did  not  amount  to  a  contract  between  the 
State  and  the  company. 

Therefore  the  Act  of  1871,  p.  56,  subjecting  a  road  to  assess- 
ment and  taxation  by  a  board  of  equalization  repealed  the  former 
act  so  far  as  the  two  were  inconsistent  and  provided  a  different 
mode  of  assessment. 

State  vs.  Railroad,  60  Mo.,  143. 


252  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs. 

40.  After  the  passage  of  the  Act  of  March  10,  1871,  confer- 
ring the  authority  upon  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  to  fix 
the  values  of  railroad  property  for  the  purposes  of  assessment, 
the  City  of  Jefferson  no  longer  had  authority  under  its  charter  to 
assess  the  property  of  railroad  companies  situated  within  its 
limits. 

Pacific  Railroad  vs.  Watson,  61  Mo.,  57. 

41.  Sec.  8  of  the  Act  of  March  15,  1875,  p.  121,  providing  a 
method  for  the  apportionment  of  the  amount  of  the  *kland  con- 
tracts7' of  the  Hannibal  &  St.  Joseph  Railroad  to  the  counties, 
cities  and  towns  along  the  route  of  the  roads  and  its  branches 
was  constitutional. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  State,  con- 
stitute the  only  restriction  or  limitation  upon  the  taxing  power 
of  the  Legislature. 

Under  the  acts  above  mentioned,  the  State  Board  of  Equali- 
zation had  power  to  equalize,  adjust  and  assess  railroad  prop- 
erty without  the  hearing  of  testimony. 

It  had  the  same  power  under  the  Constitution. 

Railroad   Co.   vs.    State   Board  of   Equalization,  64 
Mo.,  294. 

42.  While  section  11,  article  10  of  the  Constitution  of  1875 
authorized  an  increase  in  the  rate  of  taxation  for  the  purpose  of 
erecting  public  buildings  upon  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  qualified 
voters,  this  provision  of  the  Constitution  requires  legislation 
to  enforce  it. 

From  1875  until  the  Act  of  May  24,  1877,  there  was  no  au- 
thority to  increase  the  tax  levy  under  said  section  of  the  Con- 
stitution. 

State  ex  rel.  Board  of  Education  vs.  Railroad,  74 
Mo.,  163. 

43.  After  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  1875  and  until 
the  passage  of  the  Act  of  March  24, 1877,  no  authority  existed  for 
levying  taxes  for  school  purposes  exceeding  40  cents  on  the 
$100  valuation. 

State  vs.  Railroad,  75  Mo.,  526. 

44.  Until  the  Act  of  March  10, 1871,  providing  uniform  sys- 
tem therefor,  railroad  property  was  not  by  the  general  law  sub- 
ject to  taxation  in   specie. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  253 

The  only  form  was  for  a  tax  against  the  shareholders  upon 
their  shares. 

For  this  there  was  no  lien  on  the  property  of  the  company. 

Where  the  property  of  the  North  Missouri  Eailroad  had 
not  been  subject  to  taxation  and  was  sold  to  a  new  owner,  a  levy 
of  back  assessments  against  the  railroad  after  the  purchase 
could  not  be  enforced  against  said  owner  as  he  was  an  innocent 
purchaser  and  the  act  was  retrospective  and  void  as  to  him. 

The  special  board  of  equalization  created  by  the  Act  of 
March  10,  1871,  was  not  authorized  by  that  act  to  levy  taxes  for 
the  year  1871  or  previous  years  on  the  real  and  personal  prop- 
erty in  specie  of  any  corporation  which  had  not  before  that  act 
been  subject  to  taxation  in  that  form. 

State  vs.  Railroad,  77  Mo.,  202. 

45.  Assessment  of  stock  of  a  railroad  company  in  the  name 
of  the  shareholders  is  irregular. 

But  the  action  of  the  assessor  in  such  case  is  judicial. 
The  assessor  therefore  would  not  be  liable  to  a  tax-payer 
for  the  amount  collected  under  such  assessment. 

Railroad  Co.,  et  al  vs.  McGuire,  49  Mo.,  482. 

46.  As  a  general  propostion  the  Legislature  has  power  to  re- 
peal a  temporary  rate  of  taxation  and  impose  a  higher  rate. 

Where,  however,  there  has  been  some  express  contract  in 
limitation  of  this  power  upon  a  consideration  which  is  a  part  of 
the  value  of  the  grant  in  the  charter  of  a  company,  this  cannot 
be  done. 

Where  under  the  laws  applicable  to  a  railroad  company, 
provision  was  made  as  to  the  State  tax,  still  under  the  considera- 
tion the  company  was  liable  for  its  county  taxes. 

State  to  use  of  Railroad  vs.  Dulle,  et  al,  48  Mo.,  282. 

47.  The  subdivisions  of  the  road-bed  of  a  railroad  within 
the  limits  of  a  county  or  school  district  are  not  to  be  treated  as 
local  property  under  the  Acts  of  1875. 

School  taxes  on  such  road-bed  are  to  be  distributed  among 
the  school  districts  of  the  county  as  required  by  the  Act  of  1875. 

In  the  matter  of  the  apportioning  of  taxes,  78  Mo., 
596. 


254  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

48.  The  lands  granted  by  the  State  to  the  Hannibal  &  St. 
Joseph  Railroad  Company  by  the  Act  of  September  20,  1852,  are 
not  taxable  for  State  and  county  purposes  under  the  general 
revenue  law. 

The  property  of  the  company  is  represented  by  its  shares  of 
stock. 

And  there  cannot  be  any  other  property  over  and  above  the 
stock  held  by  the  stockholders. 

State  of  Missouri  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  37  Mo.,  265. 

49.  Under  the  Act  of  1871,  pp.  56-59,  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
railroads  to  take  notice  of  the  time  and  place  of  the  meeting  of 
the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 

The  law  did  not  require  the  preservation  of  the  evidence 
upon  which  the  board  based  its  valuation. 

Nor  did  it  designate  the  evidence  upon  which  such  valuation 
should  Jbe  made. 

It  cannot  be  presumed  that  the  Board  acted  arbitrarily  from 
the  fact  that  it  fixed  the  same  valuation  as  it  did  for  preceding 
years. 

The  property  of  a  railroad  being  subject  to  a  school  tax  for 
the  years  1867-1872  may  be  taxed  for  the  omitted  years,  although 
not  subjected  thereto  by  appropriate  legislation  until  the  Act 
of  1871. 

The  term  "county  taxes"  includes  road  taxes  within  the 
meaning  of  the  provision  of  the  charter  of  the  Hannibal  &  St. 
Joseph  Railroad  Company,  exempting  it  from  county  taxes. 
State  ex  rel.  Love  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  120. 

50.  A  railroad  company  whose  stock  is  by  law  exempted 
from  taxation  cannot  be  taxed  on  property  owned  by  it  in  the 
operation  of  its  railway. 

A  charter  granted  by  the  Legislature  and  accepted  by  a  rail- 
road corporation  constitutes  a  contract  between  the  corporation 
and  the  State. 

This  obligation  cannot  be  impaired  by  a  State  Constitution 
subsequently  adopted. 

Provisions  in  special  charters  of  railroad  companies  when 
inconsistent  with  previous  laws  must  be  understood  as  removing 
previous  restrictions. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  255- 

Where  by  a  special  act  in  the  charter  of  a  railroad  company 
the  stock  of  the  company  is  exempted  from  taxation  for  a  term 
of  years,  the  exemption  could  not  be  subsequently  withdrawn, 
after  the  organization  of  the  company  unless  the  right  of  amend- 
ment was  reserved  by  said  act  of  the  Legislature. 

Scotland  County  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  65  Mo.,  124. 

51.  The  exemption  of  the  stock  of  the  Hannibal  &  St.  Joseph 
Eailroad  Company  from  all  State  and  county  taxes  contained  in 
the  original  charter,  was  modified  by  the  acceptance  on  the  part 
of  said  company  of  the  Act  of  September  20,  1852. 

Corporate  property,  although  representing  the  stock  was 
subject  to  taxation  under  the  latter  law. 

The  road-bed,  machinery  and  depots  of  said  railroad  and 
other  property  used  by  it  in  operating  its  road  for  the  purposes 
of  taxation  were  to  be  considered  as  part  of  and  represented 
by  the  capital  stock  of  said  company. 

Such  property  was  not  taxable  under  the  general  revenue 
law. 

Railroad  vs.  Shacklett,  30  Mo.,  550. 

52.  Under  the  Act  of  March  10, 1871,  railroad  property  was 
not  subjected  to  taxation  in  specie. 

Prior  to  said  enactment  the  tax  was  to  be  levied  against  the 
shareholders  upon  their  shares. 

There  was  no  lien  on  the  property  of  the  company. 

Where  the  property  of  a  railroad  company  changes  owner- 
ship it  cannot  be  taxed  for  back  years  in  the  hands  of  the  new 
owners,  who  were  innocent  purchasers  under  a  general  act  pro- 
viding for  the  levying  of  taxes  for  back  years. 

The  Act  of  March  17,  1868,  amending  the  charter  of  the 
North  Missouri  Eailroad  Company  did  not  change  the  method 
of  taxation  provided  by  the  general  revenue  law. 

The  special  board  of  equalization  created  by  the  Act  of 
March  10,  1871,  was  not  authorized  to  levy  taxes  for  that  or 
previous  years  on  real  and  personal  property  in  specie  of  any 
corporation  which  had  not  before  been  subjected  to  taxation  in 
that  form. 

State  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  77  Mo.,  202. 


256  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

53.  The  convention  ordinance  of  1865  providing  that  an 
annual  tax  of  10  and  15  per  cent,  of  the  gross  earnings  of  the 
North  Missouri  Railroad  Company  should  be  paid  to  the  State 
in  lieu  of  other  taxation,  etc.,  is  not  in  conflict  with  the  Federal 
Constitution. 

In  the  absence  of  a  constitutional  restriction  the  right  of 
determining  what  portion  of  the  burdens  of  taxation  shall  be 
borne  by  an  individual  or  class  of  individuals  must  be  determined 
by  the  Legislature. 

Xorth  Mo.  Railroad,  Co.,  et  al  vs.  McGuire,  49  Mo., 
490. 

54.  The  Pacific  Eailroad  Company  of  Missouri  was  subject 
to  the  tax  of  10  and  35  per  cent,  imposed  upon  it  by  the  ordi- 
nance of  April  8,  1.865. 

The  right  of  the  State  to  impose  such  tax  was  not  limited 
by  the  Act  of  February  10,  1864. 

Pacific  Railroad  Co.  vs.  McGuire,  51  Mo.,  142. 

55.  In  a  suit  by  a  county  against  a  railroad  company  to  re- 
cover taxes  assessed  against  it  by  the  board  of  equalization,  the 
State  Auditor's  certificate  to  the  county  court  is  not  competent 
evidence  to  prove  the  action  of  the  board. 

The  record  of  the  board's  proceedings  or  its  exemplification 
is  the  best  and  only  proper  evidence  for  that  purpose  when  at- 
tainable. 

Valuations  made  by  the  board  of  equalization  without  any 
evidence  in  support  thereof  are  invalid. 

Where  a  levy  has  been  made  of  a  tax  against  the  property 
of  a  railroad,  its  action  will  not  be  disturbed  on  the  ground  of 
imperfections  in  the  Auditor's  certificate,  if  it  further  appear 
from  other  testimony  that  the  action  of  the  board  of  equalization 
was  such  as  to  authorize  the  levy. 

Washington  Co.  vs.  Railroad,  58  Mo.,  372. 

56.  The  Southwest  Branch  Eailroad  was  entitled  to  the  ex- 
emptioiis  granted  the  Pacific  Eailroad  by  the  Act  of  December  25, 
1852. 

The  acceptance  by  the  last  named  railroad  of  the  12th  sec- 
tion of  the  act  referred  to  operated  as  a  contract  between  the 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs.  257 


State  and  that  company  as  to  the  exemptions  of  the  property  of 
the  railroad  from  taxation  for  two  years  after  its  completion. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Laclede  Co.,  57  Mo.,  147. 

57.  Under  the  Acts  of  1375,  p.  120.  railroad  companies  were 
liable  for  taxes  for  the  year  1876  on  property  owned  by  them 
on  August  1st,  1876,  at  the  same  rates  as  were  levied  on  all  other 
property  in  the  State  owned  on  the  last  named  date,  for  the  year 

1877. 

State  ex  rel.  Pettis  Co.  vs.  Union  Trust  Co.,  68  Mo., 
463- 

58.  The  Act  of  September  20, 1852,  exempting  the  Hannibal 
&  St.  Joseph  Railroad  Company  from  State  taxation,  except  as 
provided  in  said  act  was  not  such  a  contract  between  the  State 
and  the  road  as  could  not  be  altered  or  repealed  by  a  subsequent 
legislation. 

Under  said  acts  the  road  was  subject  to  a  school  tax. 

By  the  Acts  of  1871,  p.  58,  it  was  not  intended  that  railroads 
should  pay  school  taxes  in  any  other  districts  than  those  through 
which  it  passed,  or  in  which  it  held  property. 

The  average  rate  of  taxation  referred  to  in  the  act  was  to 
be  made  up  from  those  districts  and  none  other. 

The  Act  of  1871,  providing  for  back  assessment  of  railroad 
property  did  not  operate  retrospectively  within  the  meaning  of 
the  Constitution. 

Livingston  Co.  vs.  St.  J.  Railroad,  60  Mo.,  516. 

59.  Under  the  Acts  of  1871,  there  was  no  authority  vested 
in  county  assessors  to  assess  the  lands  of  railroad  companies. 

All  railroad  property  is  to  be  valued  and  apportioned  by  a 
special  board  of  equalization. 

Upon  this  valuation  the  county  courts  levied  taxes  for 
county  purposes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  82  Mo.,  683. 

60.  Under  the  Act  of  March  15,  1875,  a  city  was  authorized 
to  sue  in  its  own  name  for  city  taxes  assessed  against  railroads. 

Property  which  has  escaped  taxation  through  the  State  is 
liable  to  taxation  for  the  omitted  years  in  the  hands  of  a  subse- 
quent purchaser. 

D— 17 


258  Digest  of  the  Revenue 

Under  the  Act  of  March  24, 1873,  the  county  clerk  could  only 
certify  to  cities  the  amount  due  from  railroads  for  city  taxes  by 
order  of  the  county  court. 

If  certified  by  the  clerk  without  such  order,  collection  of  the 
tax  could  not  be  enforced. 

City  of  Kansas  vs.  Railroad,  81  Mo.,  285. 

61.  Under  the  Laws  of  1877,  p.  365,  when  no  valid  subscrip- 
tion had  been  made  by  townships  to  railroads,  the  fund  arising 
from  the  taxation  of  railroads  was  distributable  ratably  among 
all  the  districts  of  the  county  except  the  tax  arising  from  land, 
depots,  workshops,  etc.,  should  go  to  the  districts  wherein  the 
property  was  situated. 

School  District  No.  I  vs.  Rhoades,  81  Mo.,  473. 

62.  Under  section  7730,  E,  S.  1889,  the  authorities  of  every 
city  wherein  any  railroad  property  is  situated  are  required  to 
certify  to  the  county  court,  on  or  before  the  10th  day  of  May  of 
each  year,  a  statement  of  the  assessments  and  the  rate  of  taxation 
levied  by  the  State  on  all  property  for  municipal  purposes. 

Under  section  7731  it  is  made  the  duty  of  the  county  court 
on  the  receipt  of  such  certificate  to  levy  taxes  on  the  railroad 
property  in  such  city  for  the  ensuing  year  at  the  rate  so  certified. 

Under  said  act,  unless  the  required  certificate  was  made 
within  the  time  required,  the  county  court  was  without  jurisdic- 
tion to  levy  the  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  77. 

63.  In  levying  taxes  on  a  railroad  company's  distributable 
property,  the  county  court  and  other  officers  do  not  act  as  judi- 
cial tribunals  but  in  invitum. 

In  the  absence  of  an  order  of  the  county  court,  the  county 
clerk  has  no  authority  to  extend  the  school  tax  upon  the  prop- 
erty of  a  railroad. 

A  railroad  company  cannot  be  heard  to  say  that  its  property 
has  been  assessed  for  local  school  taxes  at  too  low  a  rate,  as  an 
objection  to  the  taxes. 

The  aggregate  tax  on  railroad  property  for  school  pur- 
poses is  not  invalidated  by  the  fact  that  the  rate  for  each  fund 
of  the  school  tax  was  not  separately  found  and  levied. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  La:cs.  259 

Held,  in  this  case,  that  the  estimates  furnished  by  the  school 
districts  of  a  county  furnish  a  sufficient  basis  from  which  to 
ascertain  an  average  rate  for  the  taxation  of  railroads  for  school 
purposes. 

Lands  used  as  a  part  of  a  railroad  bed  upon  which  are  laid 
side  tracks  necessary  for  the  movement  of  cars  are  assessable 
by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 

The  are  not  assessable  within  the  meaning  of  section  7728, 
E.  S.  1899,  as  local  property. 

Where  a  portion  of  the  yards  is  used  for  purposes  other 
than  those  incident  to  the  operation  of  the  railroad  it  is  subject 
to  assessment  by  the  local  authorities. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  135  Mo.,  618. 

64.  An  ordinance  imposing  a  street  railway  tax  for  each  car 
operated  by  it  and  a  fine  on  the  company  for  operating  its  cars 
until  the  payment  of  such  license  is  void. 

Exemptions  of  railway  and  other  companies  from  taxation 
are  not  to  be  extended  by  construction. 

A  contract  on  the  part  of  the  city  not  thereafter  to  levy  and 
collect  a  tax  from  a  railroad  company  is  void. 

City  of  Springfield  vs.  Smith,  138  Mo.,  645. 

65.  Only  the  length  of  the  main  track  of  a  railroad  is  to  be 
considered  by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization  in  determining  the 
length  of  a  road  in  order  to  apportion  its  property  for  taxation 
under  section  7725,  E.  S.  1889. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stone,  119  Mo.,  668. 

66.  A  township  tax  levied  by  the  county  court  to  pay  bonds 
issued  in  aid  of  a  railroad  is  not  a  county  tax  within  the  meaning 
of  the  company's  charter  exempting  it  from  county  taxes. 

Section  6790,  E.  S.  1879,  requiring  an  order  of  the  circuit 
court  or  judge  to  authorize  the  county  court  to  make  a  tax  levy 
to  pay  township  railroad  aid  bonds  is  unconstitutional  as  applied 
to  a  levy  to  pay  bonds  after  the  date  of  the  enactment  of  said 
statute. 

Such  an  order  was  therefore  unnecessary  in  order  for  the 
county  court  to  make  a  levy  to  pay  such  prior  bonds. 

Where  in  an  action  to  collect  such  taxes  there  is  no  evidence 


260  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

showing  the  date  of  the  bond,  the  court  may  presume  they  were 
issued  prior  to  the  enactment  referred  to. 

When  a  statute  directs  proceedings  to  be  done  in  a  certain 
way  or  at  a  certain  time  and  a  strict  compliance  with  these  pro- 
visions of  time  and  form  does  not  appear  essential  to  the  judicial 
mind,  the  proceedings  will  be  held  valid,  though  the  command  of 
the  statute  is  disregarded  or  disobeyed. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  113  Mo.,  297. 

67.  The  exemptions  granted  to  a  railroad  company  in  its 
charter  cannot  be  extended  by  a  consolidation  of  the  latter  with 
another  railroad. 

Exemptions  attempted  to  be  granted  by  the  Legislature  to 
a  railroad  after  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  1865  are 
void. 

Exemptions  from  taxation  must  be  granted  in  terms  too 
plain  to  be  mistaken. 

A  former  adjudication  in  favor  of  a  railroad  company 
against  the  validity  of  a  tax  on  the  ground  that  its  property  was 
exempt  will  not  bar  an  action  for  taxes  subsequently  accruing. 

State  ex  rel.  Wine  vs.  Railroad,  99  Mo.,  30. 

68.  County  courts  of  the  respective  counties  have  exclusive 
jurisdiction  to  ascertain  the  rate  of  taxation  for  school  building 
purposes  to  be  levied  upon  railroad  property. 

The  action  of  the  county  court  in  such  matter  is  judicial  in 
its  character  and  the  rate  fixed  by  it  cannot  be  increased  or  de- 
creased by  the  circuit  court. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  149  Mo.,  635. 

69.  Cars  used  by  a  railroad  company  organized  under  the 
laws  of  another  state  as  an  incident  to  its  business  in  this  State 
loaded  in  Kansas  and  shipped  into  and  through  the  State  of 
Missouri,  are  not  subject  to  taxation  in  this  State. 

Such  cars  are  only  subject  to  taxation  in  the  State  where 
the  railroad  has  acquired  a  domicile. 

Cars  used  in  this  state  only  in  transitu  are  instruments  of 
interstate  commerce  and  are  not  subject  to  be  assessed  and  taxed 
in  this  State. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  261 

The  Act  of  March  18,  1895,  providing  for  a  State  tax  of  2 
per  cent,  in  lieu  of  all  other  taxes,  on  railway  cars  other  than 
those  which  are  the  property  of  railway  companies,  imposed  a 
property  tax  and  being  in  excess  of  the  constitutional  limit,  said 
act  is  void. 

This  is  true,  although  the  total  tax  thereby  required  for 
State  purposes  may  not  exceed  the  maximum  allowed  by  the 
Constitution  for  State,  county,  city  and  school  purposes. 

Said  Act  of  March  18,  1895,  being  a  whole  scheme  for  the 
taxation  of  certain  kinds  of  property  and  the  rate  fixed  and  the 
method  to  be  employed  for  its  collection  being  inseparately 
welded  together,  the  whole  act  is  void. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Stephens,  146  Mo.,  662. 

70.  The  lien  of  a  special  tax  bill  against  a  railroad  attaches 
neither  to  the  main  line  nor  to  the  side  tracks  on  the  right  of 

way. 

McCutcheon  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  72  App.,  271. 

71.  Eevenue  statutes  taxing  railroads  do  not  include  special 
tax  bills. 

McCutcheon  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  72  App.,  271. 

72.  The  Act  of  March  11,  1897,  providing  a  uniform  assess- 
ment for  taxation  of  street  -railroads  applies  to  a  street  railway 
company  whose  line  of  road  is  partly  within  the  city  and  partly 
without. 

Assessments  made  in  accordance  with  said  act  are  not  void 
because  of  a  recital  in  said  act  requiring  street  railway  property 
to  "be  assessed  and  taxes  thereon  levied  and  collected  in  the 
manner  now  provided  by  law  for  the  assessment  and  taxation  of 
other  railroad  property. " 

And  under  said  act  an  assessment  of  all  the  property  of  a 
street  railway  by  the  State  board  is  not  void,  nor  is  the  levying 
of  the  same  rate  of  taxation  on  its  property  in  each  school  dis- 
trict as  was  levied  upon  the  property  of  private  persons  therein, 

void. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Metropolitan  Street  Railway  Co.,  161 
Mo.,  188. 

73.  Switch  yards  and  other  real  property  necessarily  appur- 
tenant to  a  railroad '"s  efficient  equipment  as  a  means  of  traffic 
are  not  subject  to  taxation  by  local  authorities. 


262  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Such  property  comes  within  the  class  required  to  be  as- 
sessed by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  162  Mo.,  391. 

74.  The  statute  does  not  require  an  order  of  the  county 
court  requesting  the  prosecuting  attorney  to  present  a  petition  to 
the  circuit  judge  for  permission  to  levy  taxes  in  excess  of  those 
required  for  State,  county,  school  and  other  current  purposes  to 
specify  the  taxes  that  are  to  be  included  in  the  order  of  the  cir- 
cuit court. 

It  is  only  necessary  that  the  order  show  that  the  county 
court  was  satisfied  that  there  was  necessity  for  the  assessment 
and  levy  of  such  taxes. 

Nor  is  it  neecssary  that  the  prosecuting  attorney  state  in 
his  petition  the  facts  and  give  the  reasons  why  said  additional 
taxes  should  be  levied. 

The  petition  of  the  prosecuting  attorney  and  order  of  the 
circuit  judge  should  show  the  several  amounts  of  bonded  in- 
debtedness of  the  townships  on  which  the  extra  assessment  is  to 
be  levied  and  the  condition  of  the  general  county  revenue  as  ap- 
plicable thereto.  However,  where  they  both  substantially  show 
that  a  bonded  indebtedness  existed,  they  are  sufficient  to  author- 
ize an  extra  assessment  of  the  county  court  on  the  townships  to 
pay  such  bonded  indebtedness. 

The  extra  tax  assessment  provided  by  statute  for  paying 
township  railroad  bonds,  must  be  entered  in  a  separate  book 
known  as  the  railroad  tax  book;  otherwise  the  assessment  is 
fatally  defective. 

In  a  suit  for  taxes  by  the  collector,  the  assessment  being 
regular,  his  right  to  recover  does  not  depend  on  affirmative  proof 
of  the  delivery  by  the  clerk  of  the  tax  book  to  him. 

A  county  court  is  without  authority  to  issue  in  favor  of  a 
railroad  company  refunding  warrants  upon  the  county  treasury 
for  taxes  voluntarily  paid  by  a  railroad  company  upon  an  in- 
sufficient levy. 

Section  1809,  E.  S.  1899,  authorizing  the  refunding  of  money 
collected  under  an  illegal  tax  does  not  apply  to  money  subse- 
quently collected  to  pay  township  bonded  debts. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  165  Mo.,  598. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  283 


SALES. 

1.  Under  the  Revenue  Act  of  1877,  every  parcel  of  land  is 
liable  for  its  own  taxes. 

The  surplus  from  the  sale  of  one  parcel  could  not  apply  to 
the  payment  of  taxes  on  another  parcel. 

State  ex  rel.  Rosenblatt,  vs.  Sargent,  76  Mo.,  557. 

2.  It  is  not  necessary  that  the  notice  of  sale  should  state 
between  what  hours  the  sale  shall  be  made. 

Evans  vs.  Robberson,  92  Mo.,   192. 

3.  Under  the  Act  of  1872,  the  sale  was  invalid  unless  the 
special  execution  record  included  a  copy  of  the  judgment  and 
order  of  sale  of  the  county  court,  duly  certified. 

Ewart  vs.  Davis,  76  Mo.,  129. 

4.  A  sale  is  not  affected  by  the  fact  that  the  judgment  is  not 
against  each  tract  separately. 

Tones  vs.  Driskill,  94  Mo.,  190. 

5.  "Where  the  owner  of  land  pays  the  taxes  shown  to  be  due 
by  the  back  tax-book,  he  is  not  bound  to  take  notice  of  a  sub- 
sequent proceeding  for  a  sale  for  additional  taxes  found  to  be 
due. 

Hoge  vs.  Hubb,  94  Mo.,  489. 

6.  The  omission  of  the  initial  letter  of  defendant's  middle 
name  does  not  constitute  a  misnomer. 

Corrigan  vs.  Smith,  126  Mo.,  304. 

7.  W.  S.,  page  610,  section  45,  fixes  the  hours  between  which 
sales  for  taxes  must  be  made. 

Evans  vs.  Robberson,  92  Mo.,  192. 

8.  Although  a  sheriff  selling  land  under  an  execution  at  a 
tax  sale  does  not  sell  the  land  in  its  smallest  legal  sub-division, 
this  does  not  invalidate  the  sale. 

Hix  vs.  Perry,  7  Mo.,  346. 
Rector  vs.  Hartt,  8  Mo.,  448. 
Wellshear  vs.  Kelley,  69  Mo.,  343. 


264  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

9.  A  remainder  man  holding  under  an  independent  title  is 
not  affected  by  a  tax  suit  against  the  life  tenant. 

Allen  vs.  De  Groodt,  98  Mo.,  159. 

10.  /  A  sale  under  the  city  ordinance  is  invalid  unless  due 
notice  of  the  same  has  been  given. 

Nelson  vs.  Goebel,  17  Mo'.,  161. 

11.  Under  the  Session  Acts  of  1872,  a  ' '  successful  claimant ' ' 
is  one  who  claims  adversely  to  the  revenue  law  and  not  one  who 
claims  under  a  subsequent  tax  sale. 

Smith  vs.  Laumier,  84  Mo.,  672. 

12.  Under  the  laws  of  1872,  land  forfeited  to  the  State  for 

want  of  bidders  could  not  be  legally  resold  again  on  the  same 
day. 

Mason  et  al.  vs.  Crowder,  85  Mo.,  526. 

13.  Where  the  owner  of  land  paid  all  the  back  taxes  shown 
to  be  due  by  the  tax-book,  a  subsequent  proceeding  whereby  the 
land  was  sold  for  additional  taxes  found  to  be  due  is  not  bind- 
ing on  him. 

Hoge  vs.  Hubb,  94  Mo.,  489. 

14.  Under  2  W.  S.,  page  1206,  section  219,  if  the  owner 

would  redeem  from  an  illegal  sale,  he  must  pay  taxes,  interest 
and  costs. 

Allen  vs.  Buckley,  94  Mo.,  158. 

15.  Under  the  Act  of  1845,  the  title  to  land  sold  for  taxes 
did  not  pass  until  the  execution  of  the  deed. 

The  deed  does  not  relate  back  to  the  sale. 
Donohoe  vs.  Veal,  19  Mo.,  331. 

16.  Where  the  court  had  jurisdiction  of  the  subject  matter 
and  the  defendant,  its  judgment  is  not  void  and  a  sale  thereunder, 
should  not  be  set  aside  for  any  irregularity  before  judgment. 

Nor  in  the  absence  of  the  fraud  should  the  sale  be  set  aside 
because  of  inadequacy  of  price. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Boyd,  128  Mo.,  130. 

17.  A  suit  against  and  the  sale  of  the  interest  of  "unknown 
heirs "  in  a  tract  of  land  for  taxes  does  not  effect  the  title  there- 
in of  a  devisee. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  265 

18.  Such  devisee  did  not  ratify  the  sale,  to  which  he  was 
not  a  party,  by  accepting  surplus  of  its  proceeds. 

Hartman  vs.  Hornsby,  142  Mo.,  368. 

19.  Without  a  substantial  compliance  with  the  statutes,  a 
sale  by  a  county  collector  of  lands  for  taxes  is  void. 

Mere  inadequacy  of  price  is  insufficient  to  set  aside  a  judi- 
cial sale. 

To  set  aside  a  sale  on  the  ground  of  inadequacy  of  price, 
the  inadequacy  must  be  so  gross  as  per  se  to  amount  to  proof 
of  fraud. 

Walters  vs.  Hermann,  99  Mo.,  529. 

20.  Where  the  execution  is  special    against  -  several  lots, 
each  lot  being  charged  for  a  separate  sum,  one  lot  cannot  be 
made  to  answer  in  part  for  the  sum  due  on  the  others. 

State  ex  rel.  Beckwith  vs.  Finn,  100  Mo.,  429. 

21.  Where  a  lot  was  sold  for  an  inadequate  price  at  a  tax 
^sale,  and  it  was  susceptible  of  division,  and  apart  of  which  would 

have  satisfied  the  lien  for  taxes,  such  sale  will  be  set  aside  at  the 
instance  of  a  minor  defendant  in  the  tax  suit. 

Corrigan  vs.  Smith,  126  Mo.,  304. 

22.  Where  a  tax  sale  is  void  as  to  some  of  the  defendants 
and  voidable  as  to  others,  a  suit  in  equity  by  all  will  lie  to  set 
aside  the  same. 

Corrigan  vs.  Smith,  126  Mo.,  304. 

23.  Jurisdiction  at  a  tax  sale  against  an  apparent  owner  of 
the  land,  will  not  be  protected  against  the  real  owner,  although 

the  record  of  the  deed  of  the  real  owner  was  destroyed. 
\ 

Greer  vs.  Lumber  and  Mining  Co.,  134  Mo.,  85. 

24.  Under  the  laws  of  1872,  page  130,  section  224,  lands 
cannot  be  forfeited  and  sold  at  private  sale  on  the  same  day  they 
were  offered  under  the  execution. 

Bender  vs.  Dungan,  99  Mo.,  126. 

25.  The  life  estate  of  the  widow  of  a  deceased  person  is  not 
affected  by  suit  for  taxes  against  the  unknown  heirs. 

Berlien  vs.  Bieler,  96  Mo.,  491. 


266  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Lazvs. 

26.     In  a  suit  for  taxes,  a  stranger  cannot  intervene  through 
a  motion  to  quash  the  execution  and  levy. 

State  ex  rel.  Carter  vs.  Clymer,  81  Mo.,  122. 


SCHOOL  TAXES. 

1.  Under  section  7654,  E.  S.  1889,  no  order  of  the  circuit 
court  is  necessary  to  the  assessment  or  levy  of  taxes  for  school 
buildings,  or  of  any  tax  for  schools. 

Railway  Company  vs.  Gracy,  126  Mo.,  472. 

2.  County  courts  have  no  power  to  order  the  assessment 
of  taxes  to  build  schoolhouses  on  the  ground  that  the  school- 
house  is  unnecessary. 

The  decision  of  that  question  is  left  to  the  local  directors. 
Petition  of  Powers,  Killcullen,  et  al,  52  Mo.,  218. 

3.  Where  a  building  fund  of  a  school  district  is  not  all 
used,  the  remainder  may  be  afterwards  applied  to  the  construc- 
tion of  additional  rooms  to  the  building  for  which  the  sum  was 
originally  set  apart,  and  this  without  further  vote. 

Endly  vs.  Whitsett,  85  App.,  79. 

4.  Under  the  laws  in  force  in  1868,  school  corporations  in 
towns  and  villages  were  authorized  to  include  merchants '  state- 
ments as  taxable,  and  to  collect  school  taxes  upon  such  state- 
ments. 

State  of  Missouri  ex  rel.  vs.  Kinney  et  al,  48  Mo.,  373. 

5.  Under  the  Act  of  March,  1871,  it  is  not  intended  that 
railroads  should  pay  school  taxes  in  any  other  districts  than 
those  through  which  it  passed,  or  in  which  it  held  property. 

The  average  rate  of  taxation  spoken  of  in  that  section  on 
which  to  base  the  railroad  tax,  was  to  be  made  up  from  those 
districts  and  none  others. 

Livingston  County  vs.  Railroad,  60  Mo.,  516. 

6.  School  warrants  are  not  negotiable. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Huff,  63  Mo.,  288. 


Digesf  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  267 

7.  The  public  school  law  of  1874  does  not  create  a  separate 
fund  for  the  support  of  colored  schools,  upon  which  warrants 
for  the  payment  of  teachers  of  such  schools  must  be  drawn. 

Under  said  law,  warrants  for  the  payment  of  teachers,  of 
both  white  and  colored  schools  of  the  same  district,  are  properly 
drawn  upon  the  teachers'  fund  of  said  district. 
State  vs.  Thompson,  64  Mo.,  26. 

8.  The  Constitution  authorizes  the  limit  of  forty  cents  on 
the  hundred  dollars  valuation  of  railroad  property  for  school 
purposes  to  be  increased  by  vote. 

Railroad  Company  vs.  Lamkin,  97  Mo.,  496. 

9.  Under  section  7732,  E. .  S.,  1879,  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
county  court  to  ascertain  the  average  rate  of  taxation  for  schoo] 
and  building  purposes  from  the  official  returns  of  the  local  school 
boards  filed  with  the  county  clerk. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  no  Mo.,  265. 

10.  No  authority  is  conferred  on  a  county  court  clerk  to 
assess  property  for  school  or  other  taxes. 

He  is  only  authorized  to  assess  or  extend  the  amount  of 
revenue  to  be  apportioned  and  raised  for  school  purposes,  upon 
the  property  assessed  and  returned  by  the  regular  tax  assessor 
for  each  school  district. 

School  District  vs.  Wickersham,  34  App.,  337. 

11.  In  levying  a  tax  upon  the  property  of  a  railroad,  for 
the  purpose  of  raising  funds  wherewith  to  build  a  courthouse, 
there  must  be  an  order  of  the  county  court  levying  the  tax. 

If  the  county  clerk  extends  the  tax,  without  such  order, 
such  taxes  are  void. 

Railroad  Company  vs.  Apperson,  97  Mo.,  300. 

12.  Although  set  apart  by  law  for  a  special  purpose,  a 
county  school  fund  belongs  to  the  county. 

For  its  misappropriation,  the  judges  are  severally  liable. 

Knox  County  vs.  Htinolt,  no  Mo.,  67. 

13.  A  tax  levied  by  a  county  district  for  school  purposes, 
in  excess  of  forty  cents,  unless  authorized  by  the  district,  is 
void. 


268  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

"A  sinking  fund"  and  "interest  fund"  tax  to  pay  existing 
indebtedness  may  be  levied  without  a  vote  of  the  district. 

Railway  Company  vs.  Chapin,  162  Mo.,  409. 

14.  Where  the  voters  of  a  school  district  adopt  a  proposi- 
tion to  increase  the  tax  for  school  purposes  of  one  hundred  cents 
on  the  one  hundred  dollars,  the  power  to  apportion  the  tax  among 
the  several  funds  rests  in  the  school  board. 

The  board  is  not  bound  by  any  suggestion  in  the  election 
notes,  as  to  how  the  apportionment  should  be  made. 

The  voters  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  apportionment  of 
the  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phipps,  148  Mo.,  31. 

15.  The  clerk  of  the  county  court  is  required  to  assess  the 
amount  of  estimates  returned  to  him  by  a  school  district  on  the 
taxable  property  therein. 

He  cannot  assess  one  district  with  the  estimates  of  another. 
Nor  can  he  ignore  the  decision  of  the  commissioner,  forming 
a  new  district. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Burford,  82  App.,  343. 

16.  Under  the  Act  of  March  llth,  1879,  taxes  are  to  be 
assessed  against  street  railway  property,  and  levied  and  col- 
lected in  the  manner  already  provided  by  law,  for  the  assess- 
ment and  taxation  of  other  railroad  property. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Street  Railway  Company,  161  Mo., 
"189. 

17.  Eeal  estate  belonging  to  the  public  schools  in  the  City 
of  St.  Louis  is  liable  to  be  assessed  under  the  ordinances  of  said 
city,  for  the  construction  of  sewers,  paving  of  sidewalks,  opening 
streets,  etc. 

Public  Schools  vs.  City  of  St.  Louis,  26  Mo.,  468. 

18.  Under  the  Act  of  1S67,  it  was  the  duty  of  the  county 
clerk  to  extend  the  amount  of  school  tax  on  the  assessment  books. 

Brown  vs.  Harris,  52  Mo.,  306. 

19.  A  tax  was  assessed  and  levied  by  the  directors  of  the 
school  district  for  the  erection  of  a  schoolhouse.     Before  the  tax 
was  collected,  th£  district  was  subdivided  and  a  new  district  ere- 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  269 

ated.  In  such  case,  the  money  could  be  paid  out  only  for  the  pur- 
pose for  which  it  was  levied  and  the  township  board  had  no  right 
to  apportion  money  collected  between  the  two  new  districts. 

Rice  vs.   McClelland,  58  Mo.,   116. 

20.  The  county  court  was  trustee  for  the  care  and  manage- 
ment for  township  school  funds. 

Township  Board  of  Education  vs.  Boyd,  58  Mo.,  276. 

21.  Under  the  Act  of  March  llth,  1867,  a  certain  portion  of 
the  State  revenue  was  annually  set  aside  for  the  support  of  the 
State  University.     In  mandamus  against  the  State  Auditor  to 
compel  the  payment  of  the  annuity  for  five  years,  he  could  not 
plead  the  two  years  statute  of  limitations. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  State  Auditor,  60  Mo.,  596. 

22.  The  public  school  law  of  1874  did  not  create  a  separate 
fund  for  the  support  of  colored  schools  and  the  payment  of  the 
salary  of  such  teachers.     Warrants  for  the  payment  of  both 
white  and  colored  teachers  should  be  drawn  on  the  teachers '  fund 
of  the  district.     Section  90  of  the  Act  of  1874  provides  that  the 
money  raised  by  taxation  for  building  purposes,  could  be  applied 
only  for  that  purpose  and  money  raised  for  other  purposes  could 
not  be  used  to  supply  the  building  fund. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Thompson,  64  Mo.,  26. 

23.  Under  the  Act  of  1867,  page  165,  a  township  board  of 
education  may  set  off  from  any  district  in  said  township  so  much 
territory  as  will,  in  their  estimation^  advance  the  general  inter- 
est of  education  and  annex  the  same  for  school  purposes  to  any 
city,  town  or  village,  and  upon  the  passage  of  such  resolution  by 
such  township  board,  and  the  approval  thereof  by  the  board  of 
education  in  such  town  or  city,  such  act  became  effectual. 

Sharp  vs.  Miller,  65  Mo.,  50. 

24.  Section  SO,  article  9  of  the  Constitution  of  1865,  amounts 
to  a  mandate  of  the  Legislature  to  provide  the  means  of  sustain- 
ing a  free  school  in  each  district  in  the  State,  at  least  four 
months  in  each  year.    It  does  not  prohibit  a  more  liberal  pro- 
vision. 

Sharp  vs.  Miller,  65  Mo.,  50. 


270  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

25.  Mandamus  will  lie  to  compel  a  county  clerk  to  extend  a 
school  tax  upon  the  tax  books  according  to  the  evidence  fur- 
nished him  by  the  district  directors,  and  this  is  true,  notwith- 
standing the  clerk  has  been  directed  not  to  extend  the  tax  by 
order  of  the  county  court.     The  county  court  has  no  control  over 
the  county  clerk  in  respect  to  the  assessment  and  extension  of 
school  taxes. 

School  District  vs.  Byers,  67  Mo.,  706. 

26.  Injunction  does  not  lie  against  the  board  of  education  to 
prevent  the  collection  of  a  tax  levied  by  the  board,  when  the 
validity  of  the  tax  is  disputed  on  the  ground  that  the  board  has 
no  corporate  existence. 

Ewing  vs.  Board  of  Education,  72  Mo.,  436. 

27.  After  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  1875,  and  until 
the  passage  of  the  Act  of  March  24th,  1877,  no  authority  existed 
for  levying  taxes  for  school  purposes,  exceeding  forty  cents  on 
the  one  hundred  dollars  of  value.    . 

St.  Joseph  Board  of  Public  Schools  vs.  Patten,  62 

Mo.,  449. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Holladay,  66  Mo.,  387. 
State  vs.  K.  C.  &  N.  Railway  Company,  74  Mo.,  163. 
State  vs.  St.  Louis  and  Northern  Railway  Company, 

75  Mo.,  526. 

28.  The  distribution  of  school  taxes  lies  wholly  within  the 
control  of  the  Legislature. 

State,  vs.  Holladay,  70  Mo.,  137. 

School  District  vs.  Weber,  75  Mo.,  558. 

29.  Under  section  9749  the  qualified  voters  of  a  school  dis- 
trict have  the  power  to  determine  the  rate,  if  any,  in  excess  of 
forty  cents  on  the  one  hundred  dollars  valuation  to  be  levied  for 
school  purposes.     Nor  does  section  9750,  E.  S.  1899,  require  the 
board  of  directors  to  first  determine  the  rate  and  submit  same  to 
the  annual  meeting. 

Benton  vs.  Scott,  168  Mo.,  378. 

30.  Under  sections  11  and  12  of  article  10  of  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1875,  and  the  statutes  passed  in  pursuance  thereof,  two 
ways  are  provided  by  which  a  schoolhouse  may  be  built.     One  is 
to  levy  a  tax  and  build  it  with  funds  thus  provided.     The  other 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  271 

is  to  authorize  the  issuance  of  bonds  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the 
qualified  voters,  voting  at  an  election  held  for  that  purpose. 

Benton  vs.  Scott,  168  Mo.,  378. 

31.  After  bonds  have  been  issued  under  section  9752,  and 
the  board  has  negotiated  the  bonds,  it  then  becomes  the  duty  of 
the  directors  to  provide  for  an  annual  interest  and  sinking  fund. 

Benton  vs.  Scott,  168  Mo.,  378. 

32.  The  levy  of  a  tax  to  pay  annual  interest  and  sinking 
fund  to  pay  the  principal,  is  the  inevitable  concomitant  of  the 
constitutional  authority  to  incur  indebtedness. 

Benton  vs.  Scott,  168  Mo.,  378. 

33.  Under  the  Act  of  1875,  school  taxes  on  railroad  prop- 
erty are  to  be  apportioned  among  the  districts  of  the  county  in 
the  proportion  that  the  number  of  children  in  each  district  bears 
to  the  whole  number  in  the  county. 

In  the  matter  of  the  apportioning  of  taxes,  78  Mo., 
596. 

34.  Unless  the  townships  have  made  valid  subscriptions  to 
the  railroads,  under  the  Act  of  1877,  school  taxes  derived  from 
railroads  are  to  be  distributed  ratably  among  all  the  districts  of 
the  county. 

School  District  vs.  Rhoades,  81  Mo.,  473. 

35.  Taxes  arising  from  land,  shops  and  other  building  be- 
longing to  the  railroads  go  to  the  school  districts  in  which  said 
property  is  situated. 

School  District  vs.  Rhoades,  81  Mo.,  473. 

36.  Under  section  6880,  E.  S.  1877,«  school  taxes  can  be 
levied  against  railroad  property  for  the  purpose  of  building  a 
schoolhouse. 

State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Railroad,  83  Mo.,  395. 
State  ex  rel.  Setzer  vs.  Railroad,  90  Mo.,  166. 

37.  Taxes  for  school  purposes  proper  can  be  levied  on  rail- 
roads. 

State  ex  rel.  Setzer  vs.  Railroad,  90  Mo.,  166. 


272  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

38.  Section  6885,  E.  S.  1879,  authorizing  the  levy  of  a  school 
tax  on  railroad  property  and  providing  a  mode  therefor  is  con- 
stitutional. 

State  ex  rel.  Brown  vs.  Railroad  Co.,  92  Mo.,  137. 

39.  The  constitutional  limitation  of  -40  cents  on  the  $100 
valuation  of  railroad  property  for  school  purposes  may  be  in- 
creased by  a  vote. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Lamkin,  97  Mo.,  496. 

40.  Section  6880,  E.  S.  1879,  as  amended  by  the  laws  of  1889, 
page  230,  with  respect  to  the  levy  of  school  taxes  for  building 
purposes  against  railroad  property  is  constitutional. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Lamkin,  97  Mo.,  496. 

41.  The  order  of  a  county  court  directing  the  clerk  to  ex- 
tend a  specified  tax  at  a  specified  rate  on  a  tax-book  for  omitted 
years  is  a  sufficient  levy. 

State  ex  rel.  Trammel  vs.  Railroad,  101  Mo.,  136. 

42.  A  railway  company's  building  should  be  taxed  for 
school  purposes  at  the  local  rates  fixed  in  the  district  where  situ- 
ated and  not  at  the  average  rate  throughout  the  county. 

State  ex  rel.  Lane  vs.  Railroad,  no  Mo.,  265. 

43.  The  county  court  should  ascertain  the  average  rate  of 
taxation  for  school  and  building  purposes  under  section  7732,  E. 
S.  1889,  from  the  returns  of  the  local  school  boards  on  file  with 
the  county  clerk. 

Unless  the  rate  is  based  upon  such  returns,  the  levy  will  be 
invalid. 

State  ex  rel.  Lane  vs.  Railroad,  no  Mo.,  265. 

44.  Under  section  7654,  E.  S.  1889,  no  order  of  the  circuit 
court  is  necessary  for  the  assessment  or  levy  of  taxes  for  school 
buildings  or  for  any  school  taxes. 

Railroad  vs.  Gracy,  126  Mo.,  472. 

45.  The  county  clerk  derives  authority  to  extend  school 
taxes  on  the  property  of  a  railroad  company  from  an  order  of  the 
county  court. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  618. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  273 

46.  A  railroad  company  cannot  be  heard  to  say  that  the 
average  rate  at  which  its  property  has  been  assessed  for  local 
school  taxes  is  too  low. 

The  aggregate  levy  of  the  tax  at  the  average  rate  of  the 
school  districts  of  the  county  is  not  invalidated  by  the  failure 
to  separately  find  and  levy  the  rate  for  each  fund. 

The  estimates  furnished  by  the  school  districts  of  the 
county,  held,  under  the  facts  in  this  case,  to  have  sufficiently 
fixed  the  rates  from  which  to  deduce  an  average  rate  for  taxa- 
tion of  railroad  property  for  school  purposes. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  618. 

47.  Where  the  voters  of  a  school  district  adopt  a  proposi- 
tion to  increase  the  tax  for  school  purposes,  the  authority  to  ap- 
portion the  tax  among  the  several  funds  is  in  the  school  board. 

Said  board  is  not  bound  by  any  suggestion  in  the  election 
notices  as  to  how  the  apportionment  should  be  made. 

The  voters  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  apportionment  of 
the  tax. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phipps,  148  Mo.,  31. 

48.  The  rate  of  taxation  to  be  levied  against  railroad  prop- 
erty for  school  building  purposes  must  be  determined  by  the 
county  courts. 

No  other  tribunal  is  vested  with  the  power  to  ascertain 
such  rate. 

Legislative  enactments  with  respect  to  power  of  taxation 
are  mandatory. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  149  Mo.,  635. 

49.  The  first  school  meeting  held  in  a  newly  formed  country 
district,  in  obedience  to  a  proper  notice,  has  authority  to  author- 
ize an  increase  in  the  taxes  over  the  40  cents  limitation  to  pur- 
chase a  site  and  to  erect  and  furnish  a  school  house. 

It  was  not  necessary  that  the  notices  of  the  meeting  should 
specify  the  intention  to  vote  on  the  proposition  to  so  increase 
the  levy. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Edwards,  151  Mo.,  472- 


D— 18 


274  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

50.  A  tax  levy  by  a  country  district  for  school  purposes  is 
void  unless  authorized  by  a  vote  of  the  district. 

"Sinking  fund'7  and  "interest  fund'7  tax  to  pay  existing 
indebtedness  may  be  levied  without  such  vote. 

Railroad  Co.  vs.  Chapin,  162  Mo.,  409. 

51.  Under  the  law  of  1877,  the  lien  for  school  taxes,  when 
legally  assessed,  may  be  enforced,  although  such  taxes  be  not 
extended  on  the  tax-book  by  the  county  clerk. 

State  ex  rel.  Watson  vs.  Harper,  83  Mo.,  670. 

52.  Although  set  apart  by  law  for  a  special  purpose,  the 
county  school  fund  belongs  to  the  county. 

Knox  County  vs.  Hunolt,  no  Mo.,  67. 


STATE  TREASURER. 

1.  Without  a  special    act    of    the  Legislature,  the    State 
Treasurer  has  no  power  to  pay  any  money  except  on  the  war- 
rant of  the  Auditor  drawn  upon  some  appropriated  fund. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bishop,  42  Mo.,  504. 

2.  The  Treasurer  has  no  discretionary  power,  and  can  only 
disburse  money  as  the  law  making  power  shall  direct. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  State  Treasurer,  49  Mo.,  604. 

3.  The  State  Treasurer  may  pay  a  demand  upon  the  treas- 
ury by  a  check  upon  a  bank  where  he  has  money  on  deposit,  that 
mode  of  payment  being  in  accordance  with  immemorial  usage. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Gates,  67  Mo.,  139. 

4.  Funds  deposited  by  the  State  Treasurer,  as  security, 
under  the  Act  of  1893,  touching  bond  investment  companies,  are 
affected  with  a  statutory  trust. 

No  court  order  in  regard  to  that  should  be  made  without 
first  giving  opportunity  to  the  State  Treasurer  to  show  cause 
against  it. 

And  the  funds  should,  in  no  event,  be  ordered  from  the 
present  custodian  until  actually  required  for  some  lawful  pur- 
pose. 

Glover  vs.  Bond  Investment  Company,  138  Mo.,  408. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  275 


THE  TAX-BOOK. 

1.  The  assessor's  book  is  of  no  official  validity  unless 
signed  and  sealed  by  the  county  clerk. 

Unless  so  signed  and  sealed  the  book  affords  no  authority 
to  a  collector. 

The  St.  L.  &  S.  F.  Ry.  Co.  vs.  Apperson,  97  Mo.,  300. 
vState  ex  rel.  vs.  Cook,  82  Mo.,  185. 

2.  Unless  the  assesment  book  was  duly  verified  as  required 
by  law,  the  sale  of  the  land  for  taxes  will  be  void. 

Pike  vs.  Martindale,  91  Mo.,  286. 
Howard  vs.  Heck,  88  Mo.,  456. 

3.  The  law  authorizes  but  one  assesor's  book. 

State  ex  rel.  Harvey  vs.  Cook,  82  Mo.,  185. 

4.  Where  the  assessor  makes  two  books,  one  for  personal 
and  one  for  real  property,  and  fails  to  verify  the  latter,  the  as- 
sessment is  invalid. 

State  ex  rel.  Harvey  vs.  Cook,  82  Mo.,  185-. 

5.  The  failure  to  verify  the  assessment  books  will  not  af- 
fect nor  invalidate  a  sale  under  a  tax  judgment. 

Nor  does  it  matter  after  judgment  and  sale  how  irregular 
the  assessment  may  have  been.  . 

Boyd  vs.  Ellis,  107  Mo.,  394. 

6.  A  tax  is  not  rendered  void  by  the  failure  of  the  assessor 
to  return  real  and  personal  property  in  one  book,  nor  by  the 
fact  that  he  returns  the  original  assessor's  book  and  not  a  copy. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Bank  of  Neosho,  120  Mo.,  161. 

7.  The  assessor's  book  when  filed  in  the  county  clerk's 
office,  imparts  notice  to  every  tax-payer  of  the  valuation  placed 
upon  his  land  by  the  assessor. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Reed  &  Sutton,  159  Mo.,  77. 

8.  When  an  assessor  makes  out  his  assessor's  book  in 
proper  form,  jurisdiction  attaches. 

The  rest  of  the  proceedings  are  directory. 


276  Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws. 

Mere  inform  all  ties  in  making  the  assessment,  or  in  the  tax 
lists,  do  not  invalidate  the  tax. 

State  ex  rel  vs.   Phillips,  137  Mo.,  259. 

9.  Assessments  against  railroad  companies  must  be  en- 
tered in  the  book  known  as  "the  railroad  tax-book." 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  165  Mo.,  609. 

10.  The  requirements  of  the  revenue  law  which  does  no! 
affect  the  rights  of  the  tax-payer,  and  which  are  intended  simply 
for  the  purpose  of  system  and  convenience,  are  merely  directory. 

A  liberal  compliance  therewith,  is  not  essential. 
The  tax-book,  therefore,  may  be  bound  and  certified  in  two 
volumes  as  contemplated  by  the  revenue  act. 

Thomas  vs.   Chapin,   116  Mo.,  396. 

11.  Section  7571,  K.  S.  1879,  providing  that  the  assessor 
shall  make  out  and  return  to  the  county  clerk  "a  fair  copy  of 
the  assessor's  book,"  means  the  assessor's  book,  and  not  a  copy 
thereof. 

It  means  a  fair,  legible  assessment  book. 

The  fact  that  the  county  clerk  does  not  extend  the  taxes 
on  the  assessor's  book,  but  extends  them  on  a  copy  thereof, 
made  out  by  him  for  the  collector,  does  not  invalidate  the  taxes. 
State  ex  rel.  vs.  Lounsberry,  125  Mo.,  157. 

12.  After  the  assessor's  book  has  been  returned  to  the 
county  court,  and  corrected  and  adjusted,  it  cannot  be  authenti- 
cated by  the  affidavit  of  the  assessor,  after  the  expiration  of  his 
term  of  office. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Phillips,  102  Mo.,  664. 

13.  Although  the  copy  of  the  assessor's  book  furnished  the 
collector  by  the  county  clerk  was  not  authenticated  by  the  seal 
of  the  county  court,  this  does  not  affect  the  validity  of  tlie 
taxes. 

Although  the  affidavit  of  the  assessor  to  the  land  assess- 
ment book  fails  to  show  in  express  terms  that  he  was  the  as- 
sessor of  a  particular  county,  it  is  sufficient. 

Taft  vs.  McCnllock,  135  Mo.,  588. 


Digest  of  the  Revenue  Laws.  277 

14.  Where  taxes  are  levied  on  the  property  of  a  railroad 
for  the  purpose  of  building  a  court  house,  there  must  be  an 
order  of  the  county  court  levying  the  tax,  before  the  county 
clerk  can  extend  the  same  on  the  tax-books. 

Railroad  Company  vs.  Apperson,  97  Mo.,  300. 

15.  A  sale  of  land  for  taxes,  under  the  law  of  1872,  where 
the  tax  had  not  been  authenticated  by  the  seal  of  the  county 

court,  was  void. 

And  a  purchaser  at  a  sale  upon  such  unauthenticated  tax- 
books  got  no  title. 

Taxes  assessed  and  collected  in  this  way,  were  illegal  and 
arbitrary  exactions  which  the  State  had  no  right  to  collect. 
Burke  vs.  Brown,  148  Mo.,  309. 

16.  The  oath  prescribed  by  the  statute  (R.  S.  1899,  section 
9188),  to  be  affixed  to  the  assessor's  book,  must  be  followed 
substantially. 

A  material  departure  therefrom  will  invalidate  the  assess- 
ment. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Seaborn,  139  Mo.,  582. 

17.  If  the  collector  bases  his  report  of  a  delinquent  tax 
list  upon  an  unverified  tax-book,  such  report  is  void. 

Howard  vs.  Heck,  88  Mo.,  456. 

18.  An  addition  of  an  item  of  taxes  to  the  tax-book  by  the 
collector  is  void. 

Higgins  vs.  Ausmuss,  77  Mo.,  351. 

19.  A  folded  sheet  of  paper  is  not  a  tax-book  within  the 
meaning  of  section  7733,  E.  S.  1889. 

State  ex  rel.  vs.  Railroad,  135  Mo.,  77. 


INDEX 


Page 
A 

Abbreviations    •. 83 

Absence  of  Uniform  Assessments 5 

Administrator    154 

Advalorem    Tax    213 

Anti-Department   Store  Act 132 

Appeals 198 

Appropriations     130 

Architects    20(5 

Assessed  Values 13 

Assessments 73 

Assessment,   Back   82 

Assessment  and  Collection  of  Taxes,  Time  of 24 

Assessment  of  Real  Estate  20 

Assessment    Lists,    Publication    of 23 

Assessor     73,  275 

Assessor's    Book    275 

Auctioneers 206 

B 

Banks   83,  206 

Back   Assessemnts 82 

Barbers'    Act    133 

Beer  Inspection  Act   .' 1  ;tt 

Bills  Prepared  and  Submitted  by  the  Commission 37,     70 

Board  of   Equalization 86 

Boats    207 

Book,  The    Tax    275 

Bridges 03 

Butcher   1 67 

C 

Capitation  Tax  , 116 

Car  Companies  and  Fast  Freight  Lines 27 

Cestui  Que  Trust   225 

Certiorari 94 

Charitable    Organizations 176 

Collateral    Inheritance   Tax    134 

Collateral    Succession    Tax 134 

Collectors    .  96 


II  INDEX. 

I'age 

Comparison  of  Tax  Laws  of  thirf  and  other  States 1 

Constitution 105 

Constitution   Generally    130 

Constitutional   Limitation    4 

Corporation   Licenses    27 

County  Board  of  Equalization   86 

County    Collector    96 

County  Clerk   140 

County  Court  141 

County    Treasurer    148 

County    Warrants    150 

Current    Expenses 164-165 

Curator   147 

D 

Decedents'  Estates  154 

Deeds 155 

Deed,  The  Tax  155 

Deeds  of  Trust  and  Mortgages  29,  135 

Defects  in  Administration  of  Revenue  Laws 12 

Definitions    164 

Delinquent  Taxes   26 

Dentists   208 

Department  Store  Act  132 

Descriptions  168 

Dogs  208 

Domicile   233 

Double  Taxation    135 

Drampshops    207 

Due  Process   of  Law    136 

E 

Ejectment  169 

Engineers   208 

Equality  of  Taxation  110 

Equalization,  Board  of  86 

Estates,   Decedents    1 54 

Evidence    171 

Exemptions  from  Taxation   175 

Exercise  of  Taxing  Power „ 105 

F 

Fast  Freight  Lines,  Car  Companies  and 27 

Fiscal  Year 167 

Foreign    Corporations 137 

Franchises  24,  184 

G 

General    Assembly    199 

General  Assembly  Cannot  Surrender  Power  to  Tax  Corporations 109 

General  Assembly  Shall  Not  Tax  Municipalities 120 

General  Revenue  Measure  4 

Government  Lands    177 


INDEX.  Ill 

Page 
H 
Hotels 209 

I 

Ice    Dealer     166 

Idem    Sonans    240 

Income    Tax 137 

Injunction   184 

Insurance  Companies   • 209 

Interstate  Commerce    137 

Intoxicating    Liquors    137 

J 

Judgments 190 

Jurisdiction    ' 198 

L 

Laundries,   Steam 214 

Lawyers   138,  209 

Licenses,   Generally    200 

Licenses  for  Sale  of  Intoxicating  Liquors 28 

Liens    217 

Legislature    199 

Life  Tenant    219 

Limit  of  Municipal   Indebtedness 121 

Limitations 220 

M 

Manufacturer    166 

Merchants    165 

Mortgages    29,  135 

Municipal  Corporations  " 120 

Municipal    Taxes    26 

Municipal    Indebtedness,    Limit    of    121 

N 

Non-residents  233 

Notice   to   Tax   Payers 90 

O 

Occupation   Tax    211 

Officers    223 

Omitted   Property 22 

P 

Parties  to  Tax  Suits   223 

Payment  228 

Peddlers    213 

Personal  Property  19 

Personal  Property,  Situs  of  233 

Personal    Judgment    : . . .  190 


IV  INDEX. 

Page 

Petition    230 

Physician     138,  214 

Police  Force    138 

Power  to  Tax  Corporations  Not  to  be  Surrendered 109 

Property  Exempt  From  Taxation   110,  17.~> 

Property  Shall  be  Taxed  in  Proportion  to  its  Value 114 

Publication    , 237 

Publication   of  Assessment  Lists 23 

Pullman    Cars    236 

Purchaser  at  Tax  Sales   241 

R 

Railroads    245 

Real  Estate,   Assessment   of   20 

Recitals   t 155 

Record   Owners    224 

Refunding  Taxes    139,  228 

Remainder  men   219 

Revenue  Laws,  Defects  in  Construction  of 12 

Road    Taxes     139 

S 

Sales 263 

Sale,  The  Tax   263 

School  Taxes    ..266 

Scope  of  the  Work  

Separate  Column  in  Assessor's  Book  for  Actual  and  Taxable  Values 15 

Separation  of  State  and  County  revenue 7 

Service  by  Publication    237 

Shares  of  Stock   83 

Situs    233 

State  Board  of  Equalization,  Members  of 

State  and  County  Revenue,   Separation   of.... 

State  Tax    Commissioner    4 

State   Treasurer    274 

Statistics   29»31-     S* 

Statutory  Changes 

Steam  Laundries    2 

T 

Tax  Book    

Tax   Deed    •   155 

Tax  Lien    

Tax  Rates  for  Local   purposes    

Tax  Sales,    Generally    ; 263 

Taxation   in   Proportion   to   Value ^ I14 

Taxation  of  Mortgages   

Taxes  for  Public  Purposes  Must  be  Uniform 

Taxing  Power,   How   Exercised    

Telegraph   Companies   

Time  of  Assessment  and  Collection  of  Taxes 

Treasurer,    County    

Treasurer,    State    274 


1XIM-:X.  V 

Page 

U 

Unknown    Heirs    UIK; 

Uniformity    of    Taxation    : 100 

V 

Valuation     114 

Value  of  Property,  Taxes  in  Proportion  Thereto 1]  4 

Vehicles 215 

Voluntary  Payment 228 

W 

Warrants,  County   1 50 

Wholesale    Dealer 160 

Widow    .                           ..  227 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  5O  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $I.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


LD  21-100m-8,'34 


TU 


•fir 

/903 


180896 


